MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005366264 · doi:10.2196/resprot.3797

Gestational Age Assessment in the Ghana Randomized Air Pollution and Health Study (GRAPHS): Ultrasound Capacity Building, Fetal Biometry Protocol Development, and Ongoing Quality Control

2014· article· en· W2005366264 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ellen Abrafi Boamah, KP Asante, KA Ae-Ngibise, Patrick L. Kinney, Darby Jack, Irene Azindow, Seth Owusu‐Agyei, Blair J. Wylie

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Institutes of HealthBarr Foundation
KeywordsStoveIndoor air qualityEnvironmental healthRandomized controlled trialMedicinePregnancyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringWaste managementEngineeringSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Four million premature deaths occur yearly as a result of smoke from cooking fires. The Ghana Randomized Air Pollution and Health Study (GRAPHS) is underway in the Kintampo North municipality and South district of rural Ghana to evaluate the impact of improved cook stoves introduced during pregnancy on birth weight and childhood pneumonia. These hypotheses are being tested in a cluster-randomized intervention trial among 1415 maternal-infant pairs within 35 communities assigned to a control arm (traditional cooking) or one of two intervention arms (cooking with an improved biomass stove; cooking with liquefied petroleum gas stoves). OBJECTIVE: The trial is designed to ensure delivery of the stove intervention prior to the period of maximal fetal growth. To answer questions about the impact of household air pollution on pregnancy outcome, accurate gestational age assessment is critical. This manuscript describes in detail the development of the gestational dating protocol, intensive ultrasound training involved, ultrasound capacity building, and ultrasound quality control program. METHODS: Ultrasound training occurred in several phases over the course of 2 years. Training included a basic obstetric ultrasound course offered to all midwives performing antenatal care at the two study hospitals, followed by a more intense period of hands-on training focused on fetal biometry for a select group of providers demonstrating aptitude in the basic course. A standard operating procedure was developed describing how to obtain all fetal biometric measurements. Consensus was obtained on how biometric images are used in the trial to establish gestational age and estimate the delivery date. An ongoing ultrasound quality control program including the use of an image scorecard was also designed. RESULTS: Publication of trial results is anticipated in late 2016. CONCLUSIONS: Use of ultrasound should be strongly considered in field-based trials involving pregnant women to accurately establish gestational age, as menstrual dates may be incorrect or unknown. The inclusion of ultrasound in areas where ultrasound capacity does not previously exist requires a significant investment of time and resources. Such investment ensures appropriate training, high quality images, and accurate dating pregnancies. We outline our ultrasound training, image acquisition, quality control, and dating protocols in detail. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01335490; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01335490 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6UbERJNO6).

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.322 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations35
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207