The risk of stillbirth in pregnancies before and after the onset of diabetes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: There is significant controversy as to whether or not stillbirth is increased in pregnancies prior to the onset of diabetes. An observed increase may be indicative of risks associated with untreated gestational diabetes. It is generally accepted that the risk of stillbirth in pregnancies that occur after the onset of diabetes has been diminished by modern obstetric care. However, the degree of residual risk is not well quantified. This study sought to examine the rates of stillbirth before and after the onset of diabetes compared with the general population. METHODS: Retrospective cohort and nested case-control study. The study population was drawn from the UK-based General Practice Research Database, comprising some 300 practices, with data collection from the late 1980s until September 1999. From the base population, 913 diabetic women who had had a pregnancy were identified and 10,000 subjects without diabetes were randomly chosen as controls. Stillbirth was defined as death in utero after 20 weeks or with birth weight >500 g. RESULTS: The stillbirth rates were higher in prediabetic pregnancies (19.7/1000), and in those occurring after the diagnosis of diabetes (33.7/1000), compared with the non-diabetic population (5.5/1000). Stillbirths were matched to four live births by maternal age and year of birth. Prediabetic pregnancy and pregnancy after the onset of diabetes were strongly associated with stillbirth: odds ratio (OR)=4.68 (1.67, 13.08) and OR=4.39 (2.22, 8.64), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of stillbirth was increased in both prediabetic and post-diabetic pregnancy.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it