A randomised controlled trial of biopsy forceps and cannula aspiration for transcervical chorionic villus sampling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This trial compared two instruments for transcervical chorionic villus sampling (CVS). DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Regional university prenatal diagnosis and treatment centre. POPULATION: Two hundred women were randomised at 10(+0)-12(+6) weeks of gestation to transcervical CVS using cannula aspiration (CA) or biopsy forceps (BF). METHODS: Women undergoing indicated CVS signed informed consent. Randomisation after decision to perform transcervical CVS. PRIMARY OUTCOME: the rise in maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (alpha-FP). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: (i) placental trauma (fetomaternal haemorrhage [FMH]); (ii) laboratory, procedure, and cytogenetic results and pregnancy outcomes; (iii) patient and operator satisfaction; and (iv) economic analyses. Analyses were performed by intention to treat. RESULTS: The -FP rise did not differ between groups; there was no other evidence of placental trauma. BF were better tolerated by women, provided culturable tissue, after fewer instrument passes, with greater ease and in less time. BF were associated with cost savings. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike -FP, other markers of FMH were unaltered, questioning the reliability of alpha-FP as an indicator of FMH. Compared with CA, transcervical BF caused comparable placental trauma, appeared to be similarly effective and safe and were preferred by operators and patients.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".