MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2752970633 · doi:10.14740/jocmr3148w

Obstetric Outcomes of Twin Pregnancies in Japanese Women Aged 40 and Older

2017· article· en· W2752970633 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shunji Suzuki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsAdvanced maternal agePregnancyFetusGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the obstetric outcomes of twin pregnancies between Japanese women aged ≥ 40 years and their younger counterparts aged 25 - 29. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of twin pregnancies managed at Japanese Red Cross Katsushika Maternity Hospital between 2002 and 2016. Women aged 40 and older at delivery (n = 117) were compared with women aged 25 - 29 at delivery (n = 536). RESULTS: Although the women ≥ 40 years old were more likely to have increased risks of HELLP (hemolytic, elevated liver enzymes and low platelet) syndrome and very low birth weight neonates, there were no measurable differences in obstetric outcomes such as hypertensive disorders, premature delivery and neonatal asphyxia between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Advanced maternal age did not seem to affect obstetric outcomes in twin pregnancies seriously.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.217
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207