Time‐Varying Effects of Signs and Symptoms on Pregnancy Loss <20 Weeks: Findings from a Preconception Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although pregnancy loss affects one-third of pregnancies, the associated signs/symptoms have not been fully described. Given the dynamic nature of maternal physiologic adaptation to early pregnancy, we posited the relationships between signs/symptoms and subsequent loss would vary weekly. METHODS: In a preconception cohort with daily follow-up, pregnancies were ascertained by self-administered sensitive home pregnancy tests on day of expected menses. We evaluated the effects of weekly time-varying signs/symptoms (including vaginal bleeding, lower abdominal cramping, and nausea and/or vomiting) on pregnancy loss <20 weeks in Cox proportional hazards models and calculated the week-specific probability of loss by the presence/absence of each sign/symptom. RESULTS: Of 341 pregnancies ascertained by home pregnancy test, 95 (28%) ended in loss. Relationships between signs/symptoms and loss varied across time since first positive pregnancy test. In the first week following pregnancy confirmation, when many losses occurred, bleeding [hazard ratio (HR) 8.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.7, 16.0] and cramping (HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2, 2.7) were associated with loss even when accompanied by nausea and/or vomiting (HR 5.2, 95% CI 2.6, 10.5). After the second week, new relationships emerged with nausea and/or vomiting inversely associated (HR range 0.6-0.3, all 95% CI upper bounds <1.00) and bleeding no longer associated with loss. Probabilities of loss of ranged from 78% (95% CI 59%, 96%) with bleeding present in week 1 to 8% (95% CI 5%, 12%) with nausea/vomiting present in week 5. CONCLUSIONS: Relationships between signs/symptoms and pregnancy loss vary in early pregnancy possibly reflecting maternal physiologic response.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".