MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591195260 · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000001891

Interpregnancy Interval and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes

2017· article· en· W2591195260 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsConfidence intervalOdds ratioGestational diabetesGestational agePregnancyPreeclampsiaSmall for gestational ageLogistic regressionGestationBody mass indexBirth weightInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between interpregnancy interval and maternal-neonate health when matching women to their successive pregnancies to control for differences in maternal risk factors and compare these results with traditional unmatched designs. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 38,178 women with three or more deliveries (two or greater interpregnancy intervals) between 2000 and 2015 in British Columbia, Canada. We examined interpregnancy interval (0-5, 6-11, 12-17, 18-23 [reference], 24-59, and 60 months or greater) in relation to neonatal outcomes (preterm birth [less than 37 weeks of gestation], small-for-gestational-age birth [less than the 10th centile], use of neonatal intensive care, low birth weight [less than 2,500 g]) and maternal outcomes (gestational diabetes, beginning the subsequent pregnancy obese [body mass index 30 or greater], and preeclampsia-eclampsia). We used conditional logistic regression to compare interpregnancy intervals within the same mother and unconditional (unmatched) logistic regression to enable comparison with prior research. RESULTS: Analyses using the traditional unmatched design showed significantly increased risks associated with short interpregnancy intervals (eg, there were 232 preterm births [12.8%] in 0-5 months compared with 501 [8.2%] in the 18-23 months reference group; adjusted odds ratio [OR] for preterm birth 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-1.73). However, these risks were eliminated in within-woman matched analyses (adjusted OR for preterm birth 0.85, 95% CI 0.71-1.02). Matched results indicated that short interpregnancy intervals were significantly associated with increased risk of gestational diabetes (adjusted OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.02-1.80 for 0-5 months) and beginning the subsequent pregnancy obese (adjusted OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.05-2.45 for 0-5 months and adjusted OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.10-1.87 for 6-11 months). CONCLUSION: Previously reported associations between short interpregnancy intervals and adverse neonatal outcomes may not be causal. However, short interpregnancy interval is associated with increased risk of gestational diabetes and beginning a subsequent pregnancy obese.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.833

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.291 · 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