ArticleEvolution, medicine, and public health2023
A novel indicator of selection
Article in Evolution, medicine, and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vanishing twins, selectionEvolution, medicine, and public health · 2025Article
- The Secondary Sex Ratio and Male Mortality at Pre-Reproductive Ages: A Test of Selection In Utero.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives: Selection Methodology: We apply Box-Jenkins methods to 50 pre-pandemic birth cohorts (i.e., December 2016 through January 2020) and use the resulting transfer functions to predict counterfactual values in our suggested indicator for selection for ten subsequent birth cohorts beginning in February 2020. We then plot all 60 residual values as well as their 95% detection interval. If birth cohorts in gestation at the onset of the pandemic lost more slow-growing fetuses than expected from history, more than one of the last 10 (i.e. pandemic-exposed) residuals would fall below the detection interval. Results: Four of the last 10 residuals of our indicator for males and for females fell below the 95% detection interval. Conclusions and implications: Consistent with selection
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.