MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Timing of delivery for pregnancies with congenital diaphragmatic hernia

2010· article· en· W1482902775 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer A. Hutcheon, Blair Butler, Sarka Lisonkova, GP Marquette, C Mayer, Amanda Skoll, K.S. Joseph

Bibliographic record

VenueBJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCongenital diaphragmatic herniaMedicineGestationGestational ageDiaphragmatic herniaDiaphragmatic breathingObstetricsPediatricsHerniaPopulationPregnancySurgeryFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Please cite this paper as: Hutcheon J, Butler B, Lisonkova S, Marquette G, Mayer C, Skoll A, Joseph K. Timing of delivery for pregnancies with congenital diaphragmatic hernia. BJOG 2010;117:1658–1662. A recent report has suggested that delivery at early term ages may be associated with lower mortality among infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia. We sought to confirm this finding by examining gestational age‐specific mortality in the USA in term infants with isolated congenital diaphragmatic hernia, delivered following the spontaneous onset of labour. In the final population of 928 infants, neonatal and infant mortality decreased with advancing gestation, from 25 and 36% at 37 weeks of gestation, respectively, to 17 and 20% at 40 weeks of gestation, respectively. Log‐binomial regression models showed that neonatal and infant mortality at 37 weeks of gestation were significantly higher than at 40 weeks. Further evidence, ideally from a randomised trial, is needed before recommendations for clinical practice on timing of delivery should be made.

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)0.005
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 score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations38
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & GynaecologySame topicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia StudiesFrench-language works237,207