Management of miscarriage: expectant, medical, or surgical? Results of randomised controlled trial (miscarriage treatment (MIST) trial)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To ascertain whether a clinically important difference exists in the incidence of gynaecological infection between surgical management and expectant or medical management of miscarriage. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial comparing medical and expectant management with surgical management of first trimester miscarriage. SETTING: Early pregnancy assessment units of seven hospitals in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: Women of less than 13 weeks' gestation, with a diagnosis of early fetal demise or incomplete miscarriage. INTERVENTIONS: Expectant management (no specific intervention); medical management (vaginal dose of misoprostol preceded, for women with early fetal demise, by oral mifepristone 24-48 hours earlier); surgical management (surgical evacuation). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Confirmed gynaecological infection at 14 days and eight weeks; need for unplanned admission or surgical intervention. RESULTS: 1200 women were recruited: 399 to expectant management, 398 to medical management, and 403 to surgical management. No differences were found in the incidence of confirmed infection within 14 days between the expectant group (3%) and the surgical group (3%) (risk difference 0.2%, 95% confidence interval - 2.2% to 2.7%) or between the medical group (2%) and the surgical group (0.7%, - 1.6% to 3.1%). Compared with the surgical group, the number of unplanned hospital admissions was significantly higher in both the expectant group (risk difference - 41%, - 47% to - 36%) and the medical group (- 10%, - 15% to - 6%). Similarly, when compared with the surgical group, the number of women who had an unplanned surgical curettage was significantly higher in the expectant group (risk difference - 39%, - 44% to - 34%) and the medical group (- 30%, - 35% to - 25%). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of gynaecological infection after surgical, expectant, and medical management of first trimester miscarriage is low (2-3%), and no evidence exists of a difference by the method of management. However, significantly more unplanned admissions and unplanned surgical curettage occurred after expectant management and medical management than after surgical management. TRIAL REGISTRATION NATIONAL RESEARCH REGISTER: N0467011677/N0467073587.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".