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
BACKGROUND: The single most important risk factor for postpartum maternal infection is Cesarean delivery. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of prophylactic antibiotic treatment on infectious complications in women undergoing Cesarean delivery. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing antibiotic prophylaxis or no treatment for both elective and non-elective Cesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-six trials were included. Use of prophylactic antibiotics in women undergoing Cesarean section substantially reduced the incidence of episodes of fever, endometritis, wound infection, urinary tract infection and serious infection after Cesarean section. The reduction in the risk of endometritis with antibiotics was similar across different patient groups. The relative risk for elective Cesarean section was 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 0.48. The relative risk for non-elective Cesarean section was 0.30, 95% confidence interval 0.25 to 0.35. The relative risk for undefined or all patients together was 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.26 to 0.33. Despite the large number of trials, different populations and different antibiotic regimens, there was no statistically significant heterogeneity. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The reduction of endometritis by two thirds to three quarters justifies a policy of administering prophylactic antibiotics to women undergoing elective or non-elective Cesarean section.
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 | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.008 |
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