Hypercoiling of the umbilical cord in uncomplicated singleton pregnancies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The umbilical coiling index (UCI) is a measure of the number of coils in the umbilical cord in relation to its length. Hypercoiled cords with a UCI of >0.3 coils/cm have been associated with adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes. AIMS: The primary aim is to determine the accuracy of UCI measured on second trimester ultrasound in predicting UCI at birth. The secondary outcome is to investigate the association between hypercoiling of the umbilical cord on prenatal ultrasound and adverse maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of uncomplicated singleton pregnancies. Seventy two patients were included in the study. UCI was measured in the second trimester ultrasound, and compared to UCI measured postnatally. Outcomes of patients with hypercoiled cords on ultrasound were compared to outcomes of patients with normocoiled cords. RESULTS: Our results failed to show a strong correlation between the UCI determined with ultrasound, and the UCI determined with examination of the umbilical cord after delivery. We also did not demonstrate that measurement of the UCI on second trimester ultrasound is able to predict adverse maternal, fetal or neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that measurement of the umbilical coiling index should not be part of routine second trimester sonography in patients with uncomplicated singleton pregnancies, with no other medical or surgical comorbidities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".