MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000576913 · doi:10.3109/14767058.2013.836484

Clinical associations with uterine tachysystole

2013· article· en· W2000576913 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Smith, Judy Zacharias, Vicki A. Lucas, Philip Warrick, Emily Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUmbilical arteryIncidence (geometry)ObstetricsGestationGynecologyApgar scoreFetusPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of uterine tachysystole (UT) and its association with neonatal depression or metabolic acidemia (DEP). METHODS: This retrospective study comprised all 6234 women at ≥ 37 weeks' gestation who were monitored during the last 4 hours of tracings before birth in an academic community hospital. DEP was defined by an umbilical artery base deficit value ≥ 10 mmol/L or a 5-minute Apgar ≤ 6 and included 77 births. UT was defined by >15 contractions in 30 minutes. RESULTS: The overall incidence of UT was 18.3% (1139/6234). In 4.2% (260/6234) UT persisted for >60 min. The rate of UT was similar in births with DEP (14.3%, 11/77) compared to those without DEP (18.3%, 1128/6157; p=0.45). In births with UT, only 1.0% (11/1139) developed DEP. The DEP group had more decelerations at almost every level of contractions and a higher cesarean rate of 49.4% (38/77) compared to 24.0% (1468/6124); p=<0.001 in the group without DEP. CONCLUSIONS: UT was common, occasionally prolonged and almost always benign. Fetuses with DEP had no more UT than those without DEP. Many babies with DEP declared their vulnerability with decelerations at contraction rates below UT levels and the great majority of them never experienced UT.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal MedicineSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207