MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161484026 · doi:10.1586/erc.09.152

Cardiac drug use in pregnancy: safety, effectiveness and obstetric implications

2009· review· en· W2161484026 on OpenAlexaff
Jill Newstead-Angel, Paul Gibson

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyDrugIntensive care medicineMedical emergencyObstetricsEmergency medicinePharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Morbidity and mortality due to cardiovascular disease is increasing in pregnancy. The physiologic changes of normal pregnancy serve as a 'stress test' on the cardiovascular system. This may lead to the unmasking of a latent underlying cardiac condition or the new onset of maternal cardiovascular disease, with an attendant increase in adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. Some women with pre-existing cardiac conditions may be receiving medications that need to be altered during pregnancy owing to a risk of adverse effects on the developing fetus, but for most cardiac conditions, there are safe and effective treatment options. Women should be educated that abrupt discontinuation of cardiac medications during pregnancy usually poses a greater risk than the medications themselves, and a plan of judicious drug selection should be implemented (ideally prior to conception).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Cardiovascular TherapySame topicCardiovascular Issues in PregnancyFrench-language works237,207