MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024756877 · doi:10.1136/ebm.12.4.116

Review: drugs for mild to moderate hypertension in pregnancy reduce the risk of severe hypertension but not pre-eclampsia

2007· letter· en· W2024756877 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Medicine · 2007
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEclampsiaMedicinePregnancyHypertension in PregnancyObstetricsPreeclampsiaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abalos E, Duley L, Steyn D, et al. Antihypertensive drug therapy for mild to moderate hypertension during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;(1):CD002252. [OpenUrl][1][PubMed][2] Q In pregnant women with mild to moderate hypertension, what are the benefits and risks of antihypertensive (anti-HT) drugs? Is one type of anti-HT drug better than another? Clinical impact ratings GP/FP/Primary care ★★★★★☆☆ GP/FP/Obstetrics ★★★★★★☆ Internal medicine ★★★★★★☆ Nephrology ★★★★★★☆ Obstetrics ★★★★★★☆ ### ![Graphic][3]</img>Data sources: Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group’s Trials Register (March 2006); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2005, issue 3); and Medline, LILACS, and EMBASE/Excerpta Medica (to November 2005). ### ![Graphic][4]</img>Study selection and assessment: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated any anti-HT drug (compared with placebo or no anti-HT drug [control] or another type of anti-HT drug) for mild to moderate hypertension during pregnancy. Quasi-randomised studies and those involving treatment for <7 days were excluded. 46 RCTs met the selection criteria: 28 RCTs compared anti-HT drugs with control (n = 3200) and 19 RCTs compared 2 types of anti-HT drugs (n = 1282). ### ![Graphic][5]</img>Outcomes: severe hypertension, pre-eclampsia, fetal or neonatal death, preterm … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DCochrane%2BDatabase%2BSyst%2BRev%26rft.volume%253D1%26rft.spage%253DCD002252%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F17253478%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=17253478&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F12%2F4%2F116.atom [3]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [4]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewlow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewlow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.234 · 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