Reproductive outcomes in recurrent pregnancy loss associated with a parental carrier of a structural chromosome rearrangement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reproductive outcome studies of couples with a history of recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) associated with a maternal or paternal carrier of a structural chromosome rearrangement are limited. Correlation of carrier status and cytogenetics of miscarriage specimens is critical to estimate subsequent pregnancy outcome. METHODS: Couples found to have a structural chromosome rearrangement were followed prospectively in a tertiary academic centre. Descriptive analysis and subsequent pregnancy outcomes were tabulated and compared to historic controls. RESULTS: In 1893 RPL couples, 51 carriers of a structural chromosome rearrangement were identified (2.7%). Overall, this cohort had a total of 273 documented pregnancies. Prior to evaluation, the mean maternal age at the time of delivery or miscarriage was 29.8 years and the live birth rate was 15%. Following evaluation and treatment of concomitant factors, there were 58 monitored pregnancies, with a live birth rate of 71%. Amniocentesis was performed on 22% of the ongoing pregnancies; all were diploid or balanced structural chromosome rearrangements. Thirty-six per cent of the miscarriages were found to have an unbalanced structural chromosome rearrangement. CONCLUSIONS: Following evaluation and management of RPL, the live birth rate for carriers of a structural chromosome rearrangement is highly encouraging at 71%, without the addition of assisted reproductive technology.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".