MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986422139 · doi:10.14740/jcgo322w

Outcomes of Triplets Reduced to Twins Versus Non-Reduced Triplet Pregnancies

2015· article· en· W1986422139 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Donna B. Raval, Mary Naglak, Sara Iqbal, Patrick S. Ramsey, Frank Craparo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and Obstetrics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsGestational diabetesExact testGestationGestational ageIncidence (geometry)PregnancyObservational studyGynecologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: This study examined the outcomes of triplet pregnancies selectively reduced to twin pregnancies, compared with non-reduced triplet pregnancies using a standardized approach. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study is an observational retrospective study of all women who presented to the Fetal Diagnostic Center between 1999-2009, had triplet pregnancies in the first trimester, received prenatal care and delivered at Abington Memorial Hospital. Data analysis was performed with SPPS version 15 for Windows using analysis of variance and Fisher's Exact test. RESULTS: = .001). There was a significantly lower incidence of gestational diabetes and preterm labor in reduced pregnancies. Rate of loss, defined as delivery less than 24 weeks, were similar [3.3% versus 4.9%]. DISCUSSION: Women electing to reduce a triplet pregnancy to twins have higher gestational ages at delivery, lower rates of gestational diabetes and preterm labor, and spent fewer days in hospital than non-reduced triplet pregnancies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.121
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.886

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.121
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.280 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and ObstetricsSame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207