Obstetrical Outcomes of Patients With HIV in Pregnancy, a Population Based Cohort [25]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The study objective was to examine obstetrical outcomes of pregnancy among human immunodeficiency virus positive patients (HIV+). METHODS: A population-based cohort study was conducted using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database (2003–2011). Pregnant HIV+ women were identified and compared to pregnant women without HIV. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the adjusted effect of HIV status on obstetrical outcomes. RESULTS: Among 7,772,999 births over the 9-year study period, 1,997 were in HIV+ women, resulting in an incidence of 25.7/100,000 births. An increasing trend in incidence was observed over study period. HIV+ patients had greater frequency of pre-existing diabetes and chronic hypertension, and more smoking, drug use and alcohol use during pregnancy (P<.001). Upon adjustment for baseline characteristics, HIV+ patients had greater likelihood of antenatal complications: preterm premature rupture of membranes (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.16–1.63), urinary tract infections (OR 3.01, 95% CI 2.4–3.79), and gestational hypertension (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49–0.92). Delivery and postpartum complications including cesarean delivery (OR 3.17, 95% CI 2.88–3.49), postpartum sepsis (OR 8.43, 95% CI 5.71–12.46), venous thromboembolism (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.47–3.37), blood transfusions (OR 3.11, 95% CI 2.53–3.83), and postpartum depression (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.78–2.75) were also more common in HIV+ patients. These mothers were at higher risk of delivering prematurely (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.43–1.83) and having an intrauterine fetal demise (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.17–2.52). Maternal mortality was also elevated (OR 10.71, 95% CI 5.22–21.96). CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS: Pregnancy in HIV+ patients is associated with adverse maternal and fetal morbidities, including increased risk of maternal mortality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".