MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152839632 · doi:10.1136/eb-2013-101284

Psychoeducation for pregnant women with fear of childbirth increases rates of spontaneous vaginal delivery, reduces caesarean rates and improves delivery experience

2013· letter· en· W2152839632 on OpenAlexaff
Eileen K. Hutton, Wendy A. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Nursing · 2013
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoeducationChildbirthCaesarean deliveryObstetricsMedicineVaginal deliveryPerinatal mortalityPregnancyGynecologyCaesarean sectionNursingIntervention (counseling)Fetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commentary on: Rouhe H, Salmela-Aro K, Toivanen R, et al. Obstetric outcome after intervention for severe fear of childbirth in nulliparous women—randomised trial. BJOG 2013;120:75–84[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3] Childbirth fear among the population of pregnant women in developed countries has been positively associated with poor birth outcomes and the increased likelihood of caesarean section.1 The rising proportion of women giving birth by caesarean section and the recognition of the increased risk of maternal morbidity associated with this mode of birth, has led to … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DBJOG%26rft.volume%253D120%26rft.spage%253D75%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1111%252F1471-0528.12011%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F23121002%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/1471-0528.12011&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=23121002&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F17%2F4%2F105.atom

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0110.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.010

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 head0.344
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based NursingSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207