MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034316014 · doi:10.1177/1753495x14568055

Pregnancy in women with congenital heart disease

2015· review· en· W2034316014 on OpenAlexaff
Rohan D’Souza, Mathew Sermer, Candice Silversides

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetric Medicine · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyHeart diseaseMultidisciplinary teamDecompensationDiseaseCardiac decompensationObstetricsPediatricsIntensive care medicineHeart failureNursingCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to advances in paediatric congenital heart surgery, there are a growing number of women with congenital heart disease (CHD) reaching childbearing age. Pregnancy, however, is associated with haemodynamic stresses which can result in cardiac decompensation in women with CHD. Many women with CHD are aware of their cardiac condition prior to pregnancy, and preconception counselling is an important aspect of their care. Preconception counselling allows women to make informed pregnancy decisions, provides an opportunity for modifications of teratogenic medications and, when necessary, repair of cardiac lesions prior to pregnancy. Less commonly, the haemodynamic changes of pregnancy unmask a previously unrecognised heart lesion. In general, pregnancy outcomes are favourable for women with CHD, but there are some cardiac lesions that carry high risk for both the mother and the baby, and this group of women require care by an experienced multidisciplinary team. This review discusses preconception counselling including contraception, an approach to risk stratification and management recommendations in women with some common CHDs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetric MedicineSame topicCardiovascular Issues in PregnancyFrench-language works237,207