MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135356149 · doi:10.1159/000345341

Comparison of Wavelet Transform and Time-Domain Analysis of Second Trimester Uterine Artery Doppler Waveforms in Screening for Pre-Eclampsia

2013· article· en· W2135356149 on OpenAlexaff
F. D’Antonio, Paul Hamilton, Ralph Pinnock, Amar Bhidé, Gary E. McVeigh, B. Thilaganathan

Bibliographic record

VenueFetal Diagnosis and Therapy · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUterine arteryDoppler effectWaveformWaveletObstetricsGynecologyPregnancyGestationTelecommunicationsPhysicsComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to compare time-domain waveform analysis of second-trimester uterine artery Doppler using the resistance index (RI) with waveform analysis using a mathematical tool known as wavelet transform for the prediction of pre-eclampsia (PE). This was a retrospective, nested case-cohort study of 336 women, 37 of whom subsequently developed PE. Uterine artery Doppler waveforms were analysed using both RI and waveform analysis. The utility of these indices in screening for PE was then evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curves. There were significant differences in uterine artery RI between the PE women and those with normal pregnancy outcome. After wavelet analysis, significant difference in the mean amplitude in wavelet frequency band 4 was noted between the 2 groups. The sensitivity for both Doppler RI and frequency band 4 for the detection of PE at a 10% false-positive rate was 45%. This small study demonstrates the application of wavelet transform analysis of uterine artery Doppler waveforms in screening for PE. Further prospective studies are needed in order to clearly define if this analytical approach to waveform analysis may have the potential to improve the detection of PE by uterine artery Doppler screening.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFetal Diagnosis and TherapySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207