Requests and usage of epidural analgesia in grand-grand multiparous and similar-aged women with lesser parity: prospective observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epidural analgesia in older and multiparous women has been associated with risks. The aim of this study was to compare epidural analgesia use for labor/delivery in grand-grand multiparous women (GGMP; ≥10 births) relative to that in similar-aged women with lesser parity. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of advanced age gravida. All laboring women in a six-month period admitted to a tertiary Israeli center were included if they were advanced age (≥36 years old) with one to two previous births (Low parity; n=128) or four to five previous births (Medium parity; n=181), and all GGMP (any age; n=187). Primary outcome was comparison of requests for and use of epidural analgesia for labor/delivery. RESULTS: There were no significant differences across parity groups in percent of gravida requesting or receiving epidural analgesia (46.5-59.4%). Time from admission to epidural administration (range mean times: 168-187 min) and from advent of epidural to delivery (range mean times: 155-160 min) were comparable across parity groups. Use of other analgesia (5.8-8%) was not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Requests for and use of epidural analgesia was comparable in older gravida and was not correlated with parity. Mean times from presentation to epidural administration, mean cervical dilatation at epidural initiation, and mean time from performing of epidural to delivery were comparable across groups.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".