MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073647634 · doi:10.1097/gco.0b013e32834551cd

Preterm deliveries that result from multiple pregnancies associated with assisted reproductive technologies in the USA: a cost analysis

2011· review· en· W2073647634 on OpenAlexaff
Jason G. Bromer, Barış Ata, Meltem Seli, Charles J. Lockwood, Emre Seli

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAssisted reproductive technologyObstetricsPregnancyLive birthLimitingSingle Embryo TransferEmbryo transferInfertility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Simultaneous transfer of multiple embryos in an assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycle results in a high rate of multiple pregnancy. Besides the medical complications associated with multiple pregnancy, the financial burden of the resultant preterm infants is also substantial. The current review evaluates the costs associated with the care of preterm infants that are born as a result of ART-associated multiple pregnancies. RECENT FINDINGS: In 2006, 30% of all ART live births were multiple infant deliveries in the USA. This resulted in 48% of all ART neonates being the product of a multiple infant delivery. In the same year, 62% of ART twins and 97% of ART triplets were delivered preterm, corresponding to approximately 17 000 infants. The Board of Health Sciences Policy has estimated the mean cost of each preterm infant to be US$ 51 600. Therefore, the financial burden of ART-associated preterm deliveries is estimated to be approximately US$ 1 billion annually. This figure has remained essentially unchanged between 2001 and 2006, despite decreasing number of embryos transferred, due to increasing total number of ART cycles performed. SUMMARY: Preterm deliveries that result from ART-associated multiple pregnancies add a substantial burden to overall US healthcare expenditure annually. Policies limiting the number of embryos transferred should be considered with a perspective to increase elective single embryo transfers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations122
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Obstetrics & GynecologySame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207