MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123059334 · doi:10.1136/bmj.a1021

Effect on birth outcomes of a formalised approach to care in hospital labour assessment units: international, randomised controlled trial

2008· article· en· W2123059334 on OpenAlexaff
ED Hodnett, Robyn Stremler, Andrew R. Willan, Julie Weston, Nancy K. Lowe, Kathleen Rice Simpson, William D. Fraser, A. Gafni

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioConfidence intervalObstetricsRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionHelpfulnessNursingSurgeryInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine if a complex nursing and midwifery intervention in hospital labour assessment units would increase the likelihood of spontaneous vaginal birth and improve other maternal and neonatal outcomes. DESIGN: Multicentre, randomised controlled trial with prognostic stratification by hospital. SETTING: 20 North American and UK hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: 5002 nulliparous women experiencing contractions but not in active labour; 2501 were allocated to structured care and 2501 to usual care. INTERVENTIONS: Usual nursing or midwifery care or a minimum of one hour of care by a nurse or midwife trained in structured care, consisting of a formalised approach to assessment of and interventions for maternal emotional state, pain, and fetal position. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was spontaneous vaginal birth. Other outcomes included intrapartum interventions, women's views of their care, and indicators of maternal and fetal health during hospital stay and 6-8 weeks after discharge. RESULTS: Outcome data were obtained for 4996 women. The rate of spontaneous vaginal birth was 64.0% (n=1597) in the structured care group and 61.3% (n=1533) in the usual care group (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.27). Fewer women allocated to structured care (n=403, 19.5%) rated staff helpfulness as less than very helpful than those allocated to usual care (n=544, 26.4%); odds ratio 0.67, 98.75% confidence interval 0.50 to 0.85. Fewer women allocated to structured care (n=233, 11.3%) were disappointed with the amount of attention received from staff than those allocated to usual care (n=407, 19.7%); odds ratio 0.51, 98.75% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.70. None of the other results met prespecified levels of statistical significance. CONCLUSION: A structured approach to care in hospital labour assessment units increased satisfaction with care and was suggestive of a modest increase in the likelihood of spontaneous vaginal birth. Further study to strengthen the intervention is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16315180.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations53
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207