MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587259943 · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.14513

Preterm birth prevention in twin pregnancies with progesterone, pessary, or cerclage: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

2017· review· en· W2587259943 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPreterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
Canadian institutionsEmissions Reduction AlbertaHealth Sciences CentreWindsor Regional HospitalThe Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of CanadaSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMedicinePessaryObstetricsCervical cerclageRelative riskMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialGestationTwin PregnancyGynecologyPregnancyConfidence intervalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background About half of twin pregnancies deliver preterm, and it is unclear whether any intervention reduces this risk. Objectives To assess the evidence for the effectiveness of progesterone, cerclage, and pessary in twin pregnancies. Search strategy We searched Medline, EMBASE , CINAHL , Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ISI Web of Science, without language restrictions, up to 25 January 2016. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials of progesterone, cerclage, or pessary for preventing preterm birth in women with twin pregnancies, without symptoms of threatened preterm labour. Data collection and analysis Two independent reviewers extracted data using a piloted form. Study quality was appraised with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We performed pairwise inverse variance random‐effects meta‐analyses. Main results We included 23 trials (all but three were considered to have a low risk of bias) comprising 6626 women with twin pregnancies. None of the interventions significantly reduced the risk of preterm birth overall at <34 or <37 weeks of gestation, or neonatal death, our primary outcomes, compared to a control group. In women receiving vaginal progesterone, the relative risk ( RR ) of preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation was 0.82 (95% CI 0.64–1.05, seven studies, I 2 36%), with a significant reduction in some key secondary outcomes, including very low birthweight (<1500 g, RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52–0.98, four studies, I 2 46%) and mechanical ventilation ( RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45–0.82, four studies, I 2 22%). Conclusion In twin gestations, although no overarching intervention was beneficial for the prevention of preterm birth and its sequelae, vaginal progesterone improved some important secondary outcomes. Tweetable abstract Vaginal progesterone may be beneficial in twin pregnancies, but not 17‐ OHPC , cerclage, or pessary.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.288 · 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