MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014097602 · doi:10.4021/jcgo.v2i1.170

Platelet Indices and Blood Groups in Early Recurrent Miscarriage: A Study in Pregnant Women

2013· article· en· W2014097602 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nermin Akdemir, Arif Serhan Cevrioğlu, Selçuk Özden, Betül Kuru, Filiz Bilir, Cemil Bilir

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and Obstetrics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease Prognosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiscarriageMedicineRecurrent miscarriageMean platelet volumeObstetricsPregnancyAbortionPlateletRetrospective cohort studyGynecologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Recurrent miscarriage estimated prevalence with 1% to 3% of pregnancies and the probable causes of recurrent miscarriage are multiple, ranging from genetic, environmental, infectious, metabolic, and endocrine to anatomic causes. However, there is no study in the literature to date about the platelet indices in recurrent miscarriage.  Methods: This observational, retrospective study was investigated a total of 51 recurrent miscarriage patient and 64 healthy controls.  Results: MPV values were none significantly higher in controls than ERM (8.2 vs 8.1, P 0.75). Also there were no significantly differences between the groups related to WBC, PDW, platecrit, platelet and glucose levels. There was no significant correlation between the number of miscarriage and MPV, PDW and platectrit (P 0.25, 0.3 and 0.7, respectively).  Conclusions: In conclusion, this is the first study which compares the platelet indices in the recurrent pregnancy loss. Platelet indices such as MPV, PDW and platecrit didn’t risk factor for recurrent miscarriage in pregnant women. There is no significant difference for ABO blood group in recurrent miscarriage and control. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/jcgo90e

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and ObstetricsSame topicInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease PrognosisFrench-language works237,207