MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Strategies for investigating the maternal-fetal interface in the first trimester of pregnancy: What can we learn about pathology?

2017· review· en· W2611240227 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Judith E. Cartwright, Guy Whitley

Bibliographic record

VenuePlacenta · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAction Medical ResearchUniversity of British ColumbiaWellcome TrustMedical Research CouncilWellcomeBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsPregnancyFetusObstetricsMedicineSpiral arteryFirst trimesterEclampsiaBioinformaticsPlacentaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pathologies of the pregnancy complications pre-eclampsia (PE) and fetal growth restriction (FGR) are established in the first trimester of human pregnancy. In a normal pregnancy, decidual spiral arteries are transformed into wide diameter, non-vasoactive vessels capable of meeting the increased demands of the developing fetus for nutrients and oxygen. Disruption of this transformation is associated with PE and FGR. Very little is known of how these first trimester changes are regulated normally and even less is known about how they are compromised in complicated pregnancies. Interactions between maternal and placental cells are essential for pregnancy to progress and this review will summarise the challenges in investigating this area. We will discuss how first trimester studies of pregnancies with an increased risk of developing PE/FGR have started to provide valuable information about pregnancy at this most dynamic and crucial time. We will discuss where there is scope to progress these studies further by refining the ability to identify compromised pregnancies at an early stage, by integrating information from many cell types from the same pregnancy, and by improving our methods for modelling the maternal-fetal interface in vitro.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlacentaSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207