MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Epidural Analgesia Use as a Marker for Physician Approach to Birth: Implications for Maternal and Newborn Outcomes

2001· article· en· W2043625091 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBirth · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical dilationObstetricsPregnancyRetrospective cohort studyCohortGestationSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Understanding the association between caregiver belief systems and practice patterns is an emerging area of research. We hypothesized an association between a maternity caregiver's belief system and his or her behavior. The study objective was to determine if a family physician's overall approach to maternity care, as measured by average use of epidural analgesia, was associated with maternal and fetal outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted of the births of three cohorts of 1992 nulliparous, low-risk women attended by 96 family physicians within an 18-month period in the department of family practice at the largest maternity hospital in Canada. Cohorts were based on the physicians' mean use of epidural analgesia for the women. Family physicians attending fewer than 5 births were excluded. The main outcome measures, by physician epidural utilization cohort, were maternal/newborn morbidity, procedure rates, consultation rates, and length of stay. RESULTS: Family physicians were separated into cohorts based on their mean use of epidural analgesia at rates of: low, 0-30 percent (15 physicians, 263 births); medium, 31-50 percent (55 physicians, 1323 births); and high, 51-100 percent (26 physicians, 406 births). After adjustment for maternal age and race, patients of low versus high epidural users were admitted at a later state of cervical dilation (mean 4.0 vs 3.1 cm), received less electronic fetal monitoring (76.4 vs 87.2%) and oxytocin augmentation (12.2 vs 29.8%), sustained fewer malpositions (occiput posterior or transverse) (23.2 vs 34.2%), had fewer cesarean sections (14.0 vs 24.4%), less obstetric consultation (47.9 vs 63.8%), and fewer newborn special care admissions (7.2 vs 12.8%). CONCLUSIONS: In our setting, high use of epidural analgesia is a marker for a style of practice characterized by malpositions leading to dysfunctional labors and higher intervention rates leading, in turn, to excess maternal/newborn morbidity.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.297 · 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