Delivery of Breech Presentation at Term Gestation in Canada, 2003–2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine neonatal mortality and morbidity rates by mode of delivery among women with breech presentation at term gestation. METHODS: We carried out a population-based cohort study examining neonatal outcomes among term, nonanomalous singletons in breech presentation among all hospital deliveries in Canada (excluding Quebec) between 2003 and 2011. Mode of delivery was categorized into vaginal delivery, cesarean delivery in labor, and cesarean delivery without labor. Composite neonatal mortality and morbidity (death, assisted ventilation, convulsions, or specific birth injury) was the primary outcome. Logistic regression was used to estimate the independent effects of mode of delivery. RESULTS: The study population included 52,671 breech deliveries; vaginal deliveries increased from 2.7% in 2003 to 3.9% in 2011, and cesarean deliveries in labor increased from 8.7% to 9.8%. Composite neonatal mortality and morbidity rates at 37 weeks of gestation or greater after vaginal delivery were significantly higher than those after cesarean without labor (adjusted rate ratio 3.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.50-5.15; adjusted rate difference 15.8/1,000 deliveries, 95% CI 9.2-25.2). Among women at 40 weeks of gestation or greater, neonatal mortality and morbidity rates after vaginal delivery were significantly higher than those after cesarean delivery without labor (adjusted rate ratio 5.39, 95% CI 2.68-10.8; adjusted rate difference 24.1/1,000 deliveries, 95% CI 9.2-53.8). Neonatal mortality and morbidity rates were also higher after caesarean delivery in labor. CONCLUSION: Among term, nonanomalous singletons in breech presentation at term, composite neonatal mortality and morbidity rates were significantly higher after vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery in labor compared with cesarean delivery without labor. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".