MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Additional file 1 of Impact of air pollution on stunting among children in Africa

2024· article· en· W6902378609 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfidence intervalOdds ratioOddsTable (database)Sample (material)Sample size determination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 1: Table S1. Study sample with filtered observations by country. Table S2. Associations (95% Confidence Intervals) between in-utero PM2.5 and HAZ, and the Odds Ratios (95% Confidence Intervals) corresponding to associations between in-utero PM2.5 exposure and stunting for an increase of 10 μg/m3 in PM2.5. Standard errors presented are clustered at the cluster-level. Table S3. Associations (95% Confidence Intervals) between in-utero PM2.5 and HAZ, and the Odds Ratios (95% Confidence Intervals) corresponding to associations between in-utero PM2.5 and stunting for an increase of 10 μg/m3 in PM2.5. Standard errors presented are clustered at the cluster-level. Note that sample sizes vary across Models because some fixed effects categories lack within-category variation in the independent variable (resulting in that category being dropped). The main model is highlighted. Table S4. Associations (95% Confidence Intervals) between in-utero and early-life PM2.5 and HAZ, and the Odds Ratios (95% Confidence Intervals) corresponding to associations between in-utero and early-life PM2.5 and stunting for an increase of 10 μg/m3 in PM2.5. Standard errors presented are clustered at the cluster-level. Note that sample sizes vary across Models because some fixed effects categories lack within-category variation in the independent variable (resulting in that category being dropped). . The main model is highlighted. Table S5. Associations (95% Confidence Intervals) between early-life PM2.5 and HAZ, and the Odds Ratios (95% Confidence Intervals) corresponding to associations between early-life PM2.5 and stunting for an increase of 10 μg/m3 in PM2.5. Standard errors presented are clustered at the cluster-level. Note that sample sizes vary across Models because some fixed effects categories lack within-category variation in the independent variable (resulting in that category being dropped). . The main model is highlighted. Table S6. Associations (95% Confidence Intervals) between in-utero PM2.5 and HAZ, and the Odds Ratios (95% Confidence Intervals) corresponding to associations between in-utero PM2.5 and stunting for an increase of 10 μg/m3 in PM2.5 derived from fully-adjusted models (Model 6 in Table S3), using household-fixed effects instead of cluster-specific fixed effects. Table S7. Associations (95% Confidence Intervals) between in-utero and early-life PM2.5 and HAZ, and stunting for an increase of 10 μg/m3 in PM2.5 derived from fully-adjusted models (Model 6 in Table S4), using household-fixed effects instead of cluster-specific fixed effects.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.7660.069

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicChild Nutrition and Water Access→French-language works237,207→