Comparison of the aetiology of stillbirth over five decades in a single centre: a retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the rates and aetiologies of stillbirth over the past 50 years. STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed all autopsy reports for stillbirths occurring between 1989 and 2009 at the McGill University Health Centre to determine the pathological aetiology of stillbirths. We also reviewed maternal characteristics. We compared our results with a previous study published in 1992 on aetiologies of stillbirth from 1961 to 1988 at the same institution. RESULTS: From among the 79 410 births between 1989 and 2009, 217 stillbirths were included in our study. The mean maternal age was 31.05 (±5.8) years. In 28.1% of cases, there was a history of subfertility. The mean gestational age at diagnosis was 32.69 (±5.58) weeks, with a birthweight of 1888 (±1084) g. The main causes of stillbirth were unknown (26.7%), placental factors (19.8%) and abruptio placentae (12.9%). Other causes included haematogenous or ascending infection (10.6%), fetal malformations (8.3%), maternal hypertension (3.2%), intrauterine growth restriction (2.8%), diabetes (1.8%) and intrapartum asphyxia (1.4%). Other fetal causes were found in 12.4% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Owing to detailed pathological examination of most stillbirth cases over the past five decades at our tertiary obstetrical centre, we could study the trends in the aetiology of stillbirths in a cohort of more than 150 000 births. In 50 years, the rate of stillbirth has decreased from 115 to 32 cases/10 000 births from the 1960s to 2000s, which represents a reduction of 72%. Stillbirth from unknown cause remains the most common contributor, with 40% of these cases occurring in late pregnancy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".