MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W82274176

The effect of parental race on fetal and infant mortality in twin gestations.

2004· article· en· W82274176 on OpenAlexaff
Hongzhuan Tan, Shi Wu Wen, Mark Walker, Kitaw Demissie

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestationConfidence intervalRelative riskFetusInfant mortalitySingletonObstetricsDemographyPregnancyPopulationInternal medicineBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous work has found that singleton birth outcomes are better if the father is black and the mother is white than if the father is white and the mother is black. We sought to examine the effects of parental race on fetal and infant mortality in twins. We analyzed the fetal and infant mortality rates in four groups [both parents white (W-W), both parents black (B-B), father black and mother white (FB-MW), and father white and mother black (FW-MB)], using the 1995--1997 U.S. twin registry data (249,221 twins). Compared to W-W, the infant mortality for B-B, FW-MB, and FB-MW (respectively, relative risk [RR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.73-1.95; RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.03-1.51; and RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.26-1.77) were all significantly different from W-W but not from each other. When fetal mortality was added to infant mortality, the combined mortality was highest for B-B (RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.58-1.75), intermediate for FW-MB (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.92-1.51) and FB-MW (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.19-1.58) and lowest for W-W. Thus, twin infants born to black parents have higher risk of fetal and infant mortality compared with twin infants born to white parents and infants of mixed race parents generally have intermediate outcomes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207