Preterm premature rupture of membranes in the presence of cerclage: is the risk for intra-uterine infection and adverse neonatal outcome increased?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM) in the presence of a cerclage is associated with an increased incidence of intrauterine infection and/or adverse neonatal outcome compared to PPROM in the absence of cerclage. STUDY DESIGN: Patients diagnosed with PPROM with a cerclage (cases) between 24-34 weeks were matched (1:2.6) for gestational age at PPROM, gestational number, and chorionicity with patients diagnosed with PPROM without a cerclage (controls). RESULTS: Pregnancy latency period was not different but the rates of chorioamnionitis [clinical (26.6% versus 13.5%) and histological (92.6% versus 65.4%)] and the rates of adverse perinatal outcome were higher following PPROM in the presence of a cerclage compared with no cerclage. CONCLUSION: The presence of a cerclage in patients with PPROM appears to increase the risk of intra-uterine infection and affect neonatal outcome; it may not be justified to leave a cerclage in place in patients with PPROM.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".