MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hypertensive Pregnancy Disorders: Current Concepts

2007· article· en· W2014199861 on OpenAlexaff
Steven J. Wagner, Snezana Barac, Vesna D. Garovic

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Hypertension · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyPreeclampsiaGestational hypertensionProteinuriaGestationEclampsiaDiseaseObstetricsHypertension in PregnancyHypertensive diseaseIntensive care medicinePediatricsInternal medicineBlood pressureKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypertensive pregnancy disorders complicate 10% of all pregnancies and cover a spectrum of conditions, namely preeclampsia, eclampsia, and chronic and gestational hypertension. Preeclampsia is a pregnancy-specific disorder clinically characterized by hypertension and proteinuria that occurs after 20 weeks of gestation. It remains a leading cause of both fetal and maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Traditionally, hypertensive pregnancy disorders were considered not to have any long-term impact on mothers' cardiovascular health; however, recent studies consistently have supported the role of hypertension in pregnancy as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease later in life. Therefore, improved screening, and preventive and treatment strategies may not only optimize management of hypertensive pregnancy disorders, but may have a long-term impact on women's cardiovascular events and outcomes years after the affected pregnancies. This article will provide a brief review of hypertensive pregnancy disorders and important recent discoveries regarding their pathogeneses, while focusing on current diagnostic and treatment strategies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations114
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical HypertensionSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207