MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019078592 · doi:10.1517/14728210802568764

Emerging tocolytics: challenges in designing and testing drugs to delay preterm delivery and prolong pregnancy

2008· review· en· W2019078592 on OpenAlexaff
David M. Olson, Inge Christiaens, Sara Gracie, Yuka Yamamoto, B.F. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Emerging Drugs · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPreterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
Canadian institutionsHeritage Medical Research ClinicUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePreterm deliveryPregnancyIntensive care medicineObstetricsPharmacologyGestation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global rate of preterm delivery (before 37 completed weeks of pregnancy) is increasing and there are no effective means available to prevent this rise. Prematurity is the principal cause of neonatal mortality and a major cause of pediatric morbidity and long-term disability. Current strategies to prolong pregnancy are based on inhibiting the mechanisms that effect uterine smooth muscle (myometrium) contractions in women who are in preterm labor. Most drugs in this group were developed for other purposes. Newer strategies are designed to maintain a state of uterine quiescence and pregnancy, preventing the myometrium from initiating contractions and entering preterm labor. Again, it may be possible to use existing drugs for pregnancy maintenance. Several financial and practical barriers exist for developing completely new drugs to delay labor. Designing clinical trials to test tocolytics is complicated, as the health of two patients must be considered and the nature of preterm birth and its outcomes are different at early preterm labor (< 28 weeks) and late preterm labor (34 - 36 weeks).

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)0.003
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 score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.354
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 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

Citations33
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Emerging DrugsSame topicPreterm Birth and ChorioamnionitisFrench-language works237,207