OP04.09: What is the likelihood of spontaneous change of fetal presentation following third trimester ultrasound in twin pregnancies?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine the likelihood of spontaneous change of fetal presentation during the third trimester in twin pregnancies and to identify predictors for spontaneous fetal version. A secondary analysis of the “Twin Birth Study” in which women with twins at > =32 weeks and twin-A in vertex presentation were randomised to planned Caesarean section or vaginal delivery. In the current study we analysed the likelihood of a spontaneous change in twins presentation between randomisation and delivery. 1) 2612 women were included in the analysis. 2) The overall likelihood of change in the presentation for twin A was 3.1% and was related to the time to delivery interval. 3) The overall likelihood of change in the presentation for twin B was 24.8% and was related also to the time to delivery interval. 4) Vertex presentation of twin B and a higher estimated weight of twin B were associated with the lowest likelihood of change in presentation for twin A (1.7% and 1.9%, respectively) and twin B (18.0% and 20.5%, respectively). 6) Nulliparity was associated with a lower rate of change in presentation for twin B (21.5% vs. 27.0%, p = 0.002) but not for twin A (3.0% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.7). Supporting information can be found in the online version of this abstract Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
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 | 0.010 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".