Epidural analgesia in labour and neonatal respiratory distress: a case-control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epidural analgesia is the commonest mode for providing pain relief in labour, with a combination of bupivacaine and fentanyl most often used in practice. OBJECTIVE: To test whether late-preterm and term neonates exposed to opioids in epidural analgesia in labour are more likely to develop respiratory distress in the immediate neonatal period. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted of singleton infants born during January 2006 to December 2010. Cases were neonates ≥34 weeks gestation, who developed respiratory distress within 24 h of life requiring supplemental oxygen ≥2 h and/or positive pressure ventilation in the neonatal intensive care unit. Controls were gestation and site-matched neonates who did not develop any respiratory distress within the same period. The information on exposure to epidural analgesia and on potential confounding variables was obtained from the standardised delivery record, routinely filled out on all women admitted to the labour wards. RESULTS: In our study, 206 cases and 206 matched controls were enrolled. Exposure to epidural analgesia was present in 146 (70.9%) cases as compared with 131 (63.6%) of the controls. The association between exposure to epidural analgesia and respiratory distress in neonates was statistically significant upon adjustment for all potential confounders (adjusted OR: 1.75, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.99; p = 0.04). When data was separately analysed for term and late-preterm infants, the results were consistent across these subpopulations, showing no interaction effect. CONCLUSIONS: Late-preterm and term infants exposed to maternal epidural analgesia in labour are more likely to develop respiratory distress in the immediate neonatal period.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".