MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effect of Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure on Future Pregnancy Outcome

2005· article· en· W2001205985 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sheri-Lee Samson, J. Bentley, TJ Fahey, Deanna J. McKay, Glenn H. Gill

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsCancer Care Nova ScotiaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePromOdds ratioPregnancyObstetricsConfidence intervalGestationRupture of membranesRetrospective cohort studyCohort studyGestational ageGynecologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To estimate whether the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) is associated with an adverse effect on the outcome of subsequent pregnancies. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed. The study group comprised women who had a LEEP in Halifax County between 1992 and 1999 and then had a subsequent singleton pregnancy of greater than 20 weeks of gestation with delivery at the IWK Health Centre in Halifax, Nova Scotia. The comparison group comprised women with no history of cervical surgery who were matched for age, parity, smoking status, and year of delivery. There were 571 women in each group. The primary outcome was rate of preterm delivery at less than 37 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes included delivery at less than 34 weeks and various neonatal and maternal outcomes. The effect of specific LEEP characteristics was analyzed separately. RESULTS: Women who had a LEEP were more likely to deliver preterm overall (7.9% versus 2.5%; odds ratio [OR] 3.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.90-6.95; P < .001) and to deliver preterm after premature rupture of membranes (PROM) (3.5% versus 0.9%; OR 4.10, 95% CI 1.48-14.09). The increase in delivery at less than 34 weeks was not statistically significant (1.25% versus 0.36%; OR 3.50, 95% CI 0.85-23.49; P = .12). Women with LEEP also delivered more low birth weight (LBW) infants (5.4% versus 1.9%; OR 3.00, 95% CI 1.52-6.46; P = .003). There were no differences in other neonatal or maternal outcomes. No association was found between the characteristics of the LEEP, including depth, and the rate of preterm delivery. CONCLUSION: Loop electrosurgical excision procedure is associated with an increased risk of overall preterm delivery, preterm delivery after PROM, and LBW infants in subsequent pregnancies at greater than 20 weeks of gestation. Women who are considering future pregnancies should be counseled about these risks during informed consent for LEEP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II-2.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations189
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207