Crohn's disease, pregnancy, and birth weight
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although there is general agreement that conception should be avoided when Crohn's disease is active, many questions remain unanswered for the woman with Crohn's disease in remission who becomes pregnant. METHODS: Sixty-five charts of women with Crohn's disease quiescent at the start of pregnancy were identified between January 1993 and December 1997. Each pregnancy was matched to a healthy control pregnancy by date, age, parity, smoking status, and gestational age +/- 1 wk, and comparisons were carried out using matched analyses. RESULTS: The two groups were similar in terms of maternal height, weight, and body mass index (BMI), in addition to the matched variables. The incidence of pregnancy complications was similar for most of the complications examined, whereas the incidence of poor maternal weight gain differed significantly between the groups (17/65 vs 2/65, p < 0.001). Flare-up of the Crohn's disease was seen in 13/65 (20%) of pregnancies. The greatest differences in neonatal outcomes were in terms of birth weight (3150+/-80 g vs 3500+/-60 g) and birth weight percentile (36.7%+/-.6% vs 57.5%+/-3.4%). Overall, there were 16 (24.6%) small for gestational age (SGA) births in the Crohn's group, compared with only one (1.5%) in the control group (p = 0.0007). Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors predictive of SGA births in the Crohn's group. Ileal Crohn's disease was a statistically significant predictor (p = 0.035), whereas previous bowel resection trended toward statistical significance (p = 0.065). CONCLUSIONS: In view of the risk of low birth weight, all women with Crohn's disease who become pregnant should be followed carefully during the pregnancy, particularly those who have ileal disease or who have previously undergone bowel resection. Furthermore, smoking cessation needs to be aggressively pursued in these patients.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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".