MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3174033175 · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2021.05.014

Preeclampsia and COVID-19: results from the INTERCOVID prospective longitudinal study

2021· article· en· W3174033175 sur OpenAlexaff
Aris T. Papageorghiou, Philippe Deruelle, Robert B. Gunier, Stephen Rauch, Perla K. García-May, Mohak Mhatre, Mustapha Ado Usman, Sherief Abd‐Elsalam, Saturday Etuk, LaVone E. Simmons, R. Napolitano, Sonia Deantoni, Becky Liu, Federico Prefumo, Valeria Savasi, Marynéa Silva do Vale, Eric Baafi, Ghulam Zainab, Ricardo Nieto, Nerea Maíz, Muhammad Baffah Aminu, Jorge Arturo Cardona–Pérez, Rachel Craik, Adele Winsey, Gabriela Tavchioska, Babagana Bako, D. Orós, Albertina Rego, Anne Caroline Benski, Fatimah Hassan-Hanga, Mónica Savorani, Francesca Giuliani, Loı̈c Sentilhes, Milagros Risso, Ken Takahashi, Carmen Vecchiarelli, Satoru Ikenoue, Ramachandran Thiruvengadam, Constanza P. Soto Conti, E. Ferrazzi, Irene Cetin, Vincent Bizor Nachinab, Ernawati Ernawati, Eduardo Alfredo Duro, Kholin A.M. Kholin, Michelle L. Firlit, Sarah Rae Easter, Joanna Sichitiu, Abimbola Bowale, Roberto Casale, Rosa Maria Cerbo, Paolo Ivo Cavoretto, Brenda Eskenazi, Jim Thornton, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Stephen Kennedy, José Villar

Notice bibliographique

RevueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCOVID-19 Impact on Reproduction
Établissements canadiensHospital for Sick Children
Organismes subventionnairesGombe State UniversityUniversidade Federal do MaranhãoTranslational Health Science and Technology InstituteSt George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustUniversidade Federal de Minas GeraisUniversità degli Studi di BresciaUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignHôpitaux Universitaires de GenèveInstituto Nacional de PerinatologíaUniversità degli Studi di TorinoOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustTanta UniversityUniversidad de Buenos AiresUniversità degli Studi di PaviaUniversitas AirlanggaGreen Templeton College, University of OxfordFondazione IRCCS Policlinico San MatteoNIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust/Institute of Cancer ResearchKeio UniversityJikei University School of MedicineTufts Medical CenterUniversity of OxfordNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustUniversity of WashingtonInstituto de Seguriidad y Servicios Sociales de los Trabadores del EstadoBrigham and Women's HospitalUniversity College LondonUniversità degli Studi di Milano
Mots-clésMedicinePreeclampsiaPregnancyProspective cohort studyObservational studyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ObstetricsLongitudinal studyPandemicPediatricsInternal medicineDisease

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether the suggested link between COVID-19 during pregnancy and preeclampsia is an independent association or if these are caused by common risk factors. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to quantify any independent association between COVID-19 during pregnancy and preeclampsia and to determine the effect of these variables on maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. STUDY DESIGN: protocols and electronic data management system. A total of 43 institutions in 18 countries contributed to the study sample. The independent association between the 2 entities was quantified with the risk factors known to be associated with preeclampsia analyzed in each group. The outcomes were compared among women with COVID-19 alone, preeclampsia alone, both conditions, and those without either of the 2 conditions. RESULTS: We enrolled 2184 pregnant women; of these, 725 (33.2%) were enrolled in the COVID-19 diagnosed and 1459 (66.8%) in the COVID-19 not-diagnosed groups. Of these women, 123 had preeclampsia of which 59 of 725 (8.1%) were in the COVID-19 diagnosed group and 64 of 1459 (4.4%) were in the not-diagnosed group (risk ratio, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-2.61). After adjustment for sociodemographic factors and conditions associated with both COVID-19 and preeclampsia, the risk ratio for preeclampsia remained significant among all women (risk ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-2.52) and nulliparous women specifically (risk ratio, 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-3.05). There was a trend but no statistical significance among parous women (risk ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-2.73). The risk ratio for preterm birth for all women diagnosed with COVID-19 and preeclampsia was 4.05 (95% confidence interval, 2.99-5.49) and 6.26 (95% confidence interval, 4.35-9.00) for nulliparous women. Compared with women with neither condition diagnosed, the composite adverse perinatal outcome showed a stepwise increase in the risk ratio for COVID-19 without preeclampsia, preeclampsia without COVID-19, and COVID-19 with preeclampsia (risk ratio, 2.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.63-2.86; risk ratio, 2.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-4.45; and risk ratio, 2.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.67-4.82, respectively). Similar findings were found for the composite adverse maternal outcome with risk ratios of 1.76 (95% confidence interval, 1.32-2.35), 2.07 (95% confidence interval, 1.20-3.57), and 2.77 (95% confidence interval, 1.66-4.63). The association between COVID-19 and gestational hypertension and the direction of the effects on preterm birth and adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes, were similar to preeclampsia, but confined to nulliparous women with lower risk ratios. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 during pregnancy is strongly associated with preeclampsia, especially among nulliparous women. This association is independent of any risk factors and preexisting conditions. COVID-19 severity does not seem to be a factor in this association. Both conditions are associated independently of and in an additive fashion with preterm birth, severe perinatal morbidity and mortality, and adverse maternal outcomes. Women with preeclampsia should be considered a particularly vulnerable group with regard to the risks posed by COVID-19.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,020
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,040

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,041
Tête enseignante GPT0,344
Écart entre enseignants0,304 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations310
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentnon

Explorer davantage

Même revueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and GynecologyMême sujetCOVID-19 Impact on ReproductionTravaux en français237 207