MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2265239911

Evaluation of risk factor and complication of umbilical cord prolapsed in cesarean section

2015· article· en· W2265239911 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Rezaee, Mamak Shariat, Mehrnaz Valadan, Bita Ebrahim, Bahareh Sedighi, Mehrnoush Kiumarsi, Pouya Bandegi

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMashhad University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsOligohydramniosMedicineUmbilical cordApgar scoreObstetricsPolyhydramniosUmbilical arteryVaginal deliveryPregnancyPediatricsFetus
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Considering the rarity of umbilical cord prolapse (UCP) and lack of accurate data about the risk factors and health outcomes, we aimed to evaluate cases of cesarean section (CS) due to UCP in order to reduce treatment costs and provide information about the mortality and morbidity associated with this condition.Patients & Methods: Of 35,259 cases of CS performed in four hospitals during 2004-2012, 103 cases of UCP were selected as the case group; on the other hand, 318 cases without UCP were classified as the control group. Information was extracted from patients' records and analyzed by SPSS version 18. Results: Prevalence of UCP was estimated at 0.2%. In the case group, the active phase of labor was reported 1.4 times (81% vs 57%-P

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.449
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.151 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicGestational Diabetes Research and Management→French-language works237,207→