MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973993879 · doi:10.14740/jocmr2058w

Clinical Significance of Precipitous Labor

2014· article· en· W1973993879 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shunji Suzuki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSingletonObstetricsPopulationRetrospective cohort studyLabor inductionGynecologyPregnancySurgeryOxytocinInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Precipitous labor is defined as expulsion of the fetus within less than 3 hours of commencement of regular contractions. We retrospectively examined our cases of precipitous labor to identify the clinical significance and perinatal outcomes following precipitous labor in singleton vertex deliveries. METHODS: A retrospective population-based study was conducted comparing women with singleton precipitous labor and those with labor of normal duration. We examined the clinical characteristics and outcomes by comparing patients with precipitous labor and those with labor of normal duration in 0 and two-parous singleton pregnant women. RESULTS: Using a multivariate analysis, precipitous labor in nulliparous women was independently associated with teenagers (adjusted OR: 1.71, 95% CI: 0.99 - 2.95, P = 0.049), preterm delivery (adjusted OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.16 - 2.70, P < 0.01) and hypertensive disorders (adjusted OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.19 - 2.65, P < 0.01), while in two-parous women, it was independently associated with hypertensive disorders (adjusted OR: 2.64, 95% CI: 1.33 - 5.24, P < 0.01). No significant differences were noted between the two groups regarding maternal or neonatal complications on both nulliparous and two-parous women. CONCLUSION: Although precipitous labor was associated with hypertensive disorders in singleton vertex deliveries, it was not associated with maternal or neonatal outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.402
GPT teacher head0.649
Teacher spread0.247 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations28
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207