Combined impact of high body mass index and <i>in vitro</i> fertilization on preeclampsia risk: A hospital‐based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Overweight and obese women may be heavy users of in vitro fertilization (IVF) owing to obesity-related oligo-anovulation. The higher doses of gonadotropins required to achieve pregnancy in obese women may contribute to impaired placentation and the development of preeclampsia. This study was designed to assess the combined effect of high maternal body mass index (BMI) and IVF on risk of preeclampsia and to evaluate for an interaction between the two factors. METHODS: This is a hospital-based cohort study of 10,013 singleton pregnancies that delivered from 2001 to 2008 at a tertiary hospital in Montreal, Canada. The combined effect of high BMI and IVF on preeclampsia versus no risk factors was estimated in multivariate logistic regression models fitted with an interaction term between high BMI (> 25 or > 30 kg/m(2) ) and IVF. RESULTS: IVF pregnancies in obese women had a considerably higher risk of preeclampsia than spontaneous nonobese pregnancies (OR 6.7, 95% CI 3.3-13.8; p interaction 0.03). IVF was not independently associated with preeclampsia (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.4). Analyses were similar in subgroup analyses and in analyses correcting for bias. CONCLUSIONS: High BMI is strongly associated with preeclampsia, and this risk is compounded in IVF pregnancies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".