International values for haemoglobin distributions in healthy pregnant women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anaemia in pregnancy is a global health problem with associated morbidity and mortality.A secondary analysis of prospective, population-based study from 2009 to 2016 to generate maternal haemoglobin normative centiles in uncomplicated pregnancies in women receiving optimal antenatal care. Pregnant women were enrolled <14 weeks' gestation in the Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study (FGLS) of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project which involved eight geographically diverse urban areas in Brazil, China, India, Italy, Kenya, Oman, United Kingdom and United States. At each 5 ± 1 weekly visit until delivery, information was collected about the pregnancy, as well as the results of blood tests taken as part of routine antenatal care that complemented the study's requirements, including haemoglobin values.A total of 3502 (81%) of 4321 women who delivered a live, singleton newborn with no visible congenital anomalies, contributed at least one haemoglobin value. Median haemoglobin concentrations ranged from 114.6 to 121.4 g/L, 94 to 103 g/L at the 3rd centile, and from 135 to 141 g/L at the 97th centile. The lowest values were seen between 31 and 32 weeks' gestation, representing a mean drop of 6.8 g/L compared to 14 weeks' gestation. The percentage variation in maternal haemoglobin within-site was 47% of the total variance compared to 13% between sites.We have generated International, gestational age-specific, smoothed centiles for maternal haemoglobin concentration compatible with better pregnancy outcomes, as well as adequate neonatal and early childhood morbidity, growth and development up to 2 years of age.Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Grant number 49038.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".