Insulin-like growth factor 1 and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 3 in central precocious puberty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To identify distinct patterns of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3) in girls with central precocious puberty (CPP), and to compare IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 levels in patients with CPP and precocious thelarche (PT). A literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases was done to identify observational studies. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the studies. Pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. Fourteen studies were included. As opposed to age-matched or similar-aged pre-pubertal girls, patients with CPP had significantly higher levels of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3. CPP was associated with higher levels of IGF-1 approaching statistical significance but similar levels of IGFBP-3 compared to PT. Distinct hormonal patterns, such as elevated IGF-1 and IGFBP-3, were identified in patients with CPP, suggesting a potential diagnostic value of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 levels.
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 | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".