Obstetric bleeding among women with inherited bleeding disorders: a retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Women with inherited bleeding disorders are at increased risk for bleeding complications during pregnancy and the postpartum period, particularly postpartum haemorrhage (PPH). AIM: This retrospective study evaluates pregnancy management through the Inherited Bleeding Disorders Clinic of Southeastern Ontario, the clinical factors associated with pregnancy-related abnormal bleeding and assesses tranexamic acid use in the postpartum treatment of bleeding disorder patients. METHODS: A chart review of 62 pregnancies, from 33 women, evaluated patient characteristics (age, haemostatic factor levels) and delivery conditions (mode of delivery, postpartum treatment) in relation to abnormal postpartum bleeding. RESULTS: This cohort revealed increased risk of immediate PPH with increased age at delivery (mean age: 30.1 years with PPH, 26.5 years without PPH, P < 0.013), and birth by vaginal delivery (P < 0.042). Low von Willebrand factor (VWF) antigen or factor VIII (FVIII) in the third trimester was not associated with an increased risk of PPH; however, low VWF:RCo was associated with increased immediate PPH despite treatment with continuous factor infusion (P < 0.042). Women treated with tranexamic acid postpartum had less severe bleeding in the 6-week postpartum (P < 0.049) with no thrombotic complications. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to the growing body of work aimed at optimizing management of bleeding disorder patients through pregnancy and the postpartum period, showing patients are at a higher risk of PPH as they age. Risk factors such as low third trimester VWF:RCo have been identified. Treatment with tranexamic acid in the postpartum period is associated with a reduced incidence of abnormal postpartum bleeding.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".