Intravenous Nitroglycerin for External Cephalic Version
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate whether treatment with intravenous nitroglycerin for uterine relaxation increases the chance of successful external cephalic version. METHODS: Two double-blind, randomized clinical trials were undertaken: one in nulliparous women and a second in multiparous women. Women presenting for external cephalic version at term were eligible to participate. The primary outcome was immediate success of external cephalic version. Other outcomes were presentation at delivery, cesarean delivery rate, and side effects and complications. Sample size calculations were based on a 100% increase in success of external cephalic version with a one-sided analysis and alpha=0.05 (80% power). RESULT: In total, 126 women were recruited-82 in the nulliparous trial and 44 in the multiparous trial. Seven patients did not have external cephalic version before delivery but were included in the analysis of success of external cephalic version. One patient was lost to follow-up. The external cephalic version success rate for nulliparous patients was 24% (10 of 42) in patients who received nitroglycerin compared with 8% (3 of 40) in those who receive placebo (P=.04, one-sided Fisher exact test, odds ratio 3.85, lower bound 1.22). In multiparous patients, the external cephalic version success rate did not differ significantly between groups: 44% (10 of 23) in the nitroglycerin group compared with 43% (9 of 21) in the placebo group (P=.60). CONCLUSION: Treatment with intravenous nitroglycerin increased the rate of successful external cephalic version in nulliparous, but not in multiparous, women. Treatment with intravenous nitroglycerin appeared to be safe, but our numbers were too small to rule out rare serious adverse effects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".