MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098051392 · doi:10.3109/01674820009075621

Psychosocial predictors of labor/ delivery complications and infant birth weight: A prospective multivariate study

2000· article· en· W2098051392 on OpenAlexaff
Deborah Da Costa, Maria Dritsa, Julie Larouche, William Brender

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialSocial supportPregnancyBirth weightMedicineCoping (psychology)ObstetricsMultivariate analysisProspective cohort studyPsychologyDemographyClinical psychologyPsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a multidimensional approach to measure stress, this study prospectively examined the influence of maternal stress, social support and coping styles on labor/delivery complications and infant birth weight. Beginning in the third month of pregnancy, stress was assessed monthly. In each trimester, data on social support, coping strategies, lifestyle behaviors and pregnancy progress were collected. One month following delivery, information on labor, delivery and infant status was obtained. The final sample consisted of 80 women. The results demonstrated that women who experienced greater stress during pregnancy had a more difficult labor/delivery, even after controlling for parity. Younger maternal age was also linked with intrapartum complications. Perceived prenatal social support emerged as a predictor of infant birth weight. Women who reported less satisfaction with their social support in the second trimester gave birth to infants of lower birth weight. The results suggest an association between specific psychosocial variables and negative birth outcomes.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations104
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & GynecologySame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207