MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1547332643 · doi:10.1002/uog.13555

<scp>OC</scp>14.07: Lower uterine segment thickness for prevention of uterine rupture and prediction of uterine scar dehiscence: a multicentre prospective study

2014· article· en· W1547332643 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole Jastrow, Nils Chaillet, Suzanne Demers, M. Fusco Girard, Robert Gauthier, Jean‐Charles Pasquier, Michel Boulvain, Emmanuel Bujold

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUterine ruptureDehiscenceReceiver operating characteristicGestational ageObstetricsGynecologyGestationPregnancyUterusSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To estimate the impact of third-trimester lower uterine segment (LUS) thickness measurement on the rate of uterine rupture and to compare abdominal and vaginal measurements for the prediction of uterine scar dehiscence. Women with a prior single low-transverse Caesarean were recruited at 34–38 weeks of gestation. LUS thickness was measured by transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasounds and the thinnest measurement was considered as the primary independent variable. Participants and health care providers were kept blinded except when LUS thickness was below 2.5 mm: they were informed about the risk of uterine rupture during trial of labour (TOL). Our primary outcomes were symptomatic uterine rupture that required urgent Caesarean during TOL and complete uterine scar dehiscence at the time of elective repeat Caesarean (ERC). Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) were used to compare the predictive values of each technique. We recruited 1853 women at a mean gestational age of 36.7 ± 1.2 weeks and we obtained 99% (n = 1839) complete follow-up. LUS thickness was below 2.5 mm in 410 (22%). Successful VBAC occurred in 685 (67%) out of 987 TOL while no symptomatic uterine rupture was observed. Out of 852 women who underwent ERC, we found a significant correlation between LUS thickness and uterine scar defect (p < 0.001) with the highest AUC observed when vaginal and abdominal measurements were combined (0.85; 95%CI 0.79 - 0.91), followed by vaginal (0.82; 95%CI 0.75- 0.89), and abdominal (0.78; 95%CI 0.70 - 0.88) measurements only. LUS below 2.3 mm was associated with sensitivity of 86%, specificity of 74%, positive predictive value of 8%, and negative predictive value of 99.5%. Performing third-trimester measurement of LUS thickness is efficient to prevent symptomatic uterine rupture. The optimal prediction of uterine scar dehiscence is achieved by the combination of abdominal and vaginal ultrasound.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207