Changes suggestive of post‐partum thyroiditis in women with established hypothyroidism: incidence and predictors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Post-partum thyroiditis (PPT) is a common phenomenon in the general population. To date there have been few studies examining the incidence of PPT in women with hypothyroidism antedating pregnancy. This study aimed to assess the incidence and potential predictors of PPT in women with treated hypothyroidism antedating pregnancy. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compiled a cohort of 97 women with previous hypothyroidism antedating pregnancy seen in the Endocrinology in Pregnancy clinic from 1999 to 2011, collecting data on thyroid function, antibodies and levothyroxine doses post-partum. The incidence of PPT and its predictors were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 66 (68%) women had fluctuations in thyroid function consistent with PPT. Of these, 22 (33%) had a hyperthyroid phase alone, 22 (33%) had a hypothyroid phase alone and 22 (33%) had both a hyper and hypo phase. The majority of women had their dose of thyroid medication adjusted during the PPT episode. Women who were on a full dose of thyroxine post-partum were significantly less likely to have a hypothyroid phase. In multivariable analysis, the only predictor of PPT was the presence of thyroid antibodies, with 83% of antibody positive women having PPT compared to 44% of antibody negative women (P = 0·0001). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, 2/3 of women had fluctuations in thyroid function consistent with PPT and most required adjustment of their thyroid dose. Women with hypothyroidism antedating pregnancy are at high risk for PPT and should be closely monitored during the first year post-partum.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".