MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136380577

Treating constipation during pregnancy.

2012· article· en· W2136380577 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstipationPregnancyMedicineLaxativeIntensive care medicineInternal medicineObstetrics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

QUESTION: Many of my patients experience constipation during pregnancy, even after increasing dietary fibre and fluids. Are there any safe treatments I can recommend to them? ANSWER: Although the recommended first-line therapy for constipation includes increasing fibre, fluids, and exercise, these are sometimes ineffective. Therefore, laxatives such as bulk-forming agents, lubricant laxatives, stool softeners, osmotic laxatives, and stimulant laxatives might be considered. Although few of the various types of laxatives have been assessed for safety in pregnancy, they have minimal systemic absorption. Therefore, they are not expected to be associated with an increased risk of congenital anomalies. However, it is recommended that osmotic and stimulant laxatives be used only in the short term or occasionally to avoid dehydration or electrolyte imbalances in pregnant women.

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.

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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.216 · 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