Maternal mortality attributable to vascular dissection and rupture in the Netherlands: a nationwide confidential enquiry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of maternal deaths attributable to vascular dissection and rupture in the Netherlands, and to assess clinical features, risk factors and the frequency of substandard care in the cases identified. DESIGN: Confidential enquiry into the causes of maternal deaths. SETTING: Nationwide in the Netherlands. POPULATION: A total of 3,108,235 live births. METHODS: Data analysis of all cases of maternal death from vascular dissection and rupture in the period 1993-2008. A literature review was also performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence, clinical features, risk factors and frequency of substandard care. RESULTS: A total of 23 maternal deaths attributable to vascular dissection and rupture were reported. In most cases the location was aortic (n=13), followed by coronary (n=4) and splenic (n=3) arteries. Clinical features were various, but most women presented with sudden unexplainable pain. Risk factors were present in 14 cases (61%), with hypertension being most frequently reported in ten cases (43%). Substandard care was determined to have been received in 13 cases (56%), inadequate assessment of complaints and a delay in diagnosis being the most frequent problems identified. CONCLUSIONS: Vascular dissection and rupture in pregnancy, although rare, carry a high risk of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. Because of the rarity of this condition and its variety in presentation, diagnosis is easily missed. A high index of suspicion when a woman presents with suggestive complaints, leading to an early diagnosis, may improve the prognosis for the woman and her child.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".