MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769314807 · doi:10.1016/j.preghy.2017.11.006

Prediction of adverse maternal outcomes from pre-eclampsia and other hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: A systematic review

2017· review· en· W2769314807 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePregnancy Hypertension · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyEclampsiaCINAHLReceiver operating characteristicLikelihood ratios in diagnostic testingAdverse effectMEDLINEObstetricsIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePsychiatryPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. The ability to predict these complications using simple tests could aid in management and improve outcomes. We aimed to systematically review studies that reported on potential predictors of adverse maternal outcomes among women with a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL (inception - December 2016) for studies of predictors of severe maternal complications among women with a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy. Studies were selected in a two-stage process by two independent reviewers, excluding those reporting only on adverse fetal outcomes. We extracted data on study and test(s) characteristics and outcomes. Accuracy of prediction was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC). Strong evidence of prediction was taken to be a positive likelihood ratio >10 or a negative likelihood ratio <0.1, and for multivariable models, an AUROC ≥0.70. Bivariate random effects models were used to summarise performance when possible. RESULTS: Of 32 studies included, 28 presented only model development and four examined external validation. Tests included symptoms and signs, laboratory tests and biomarkers. No single test was a strong independent predictor of outcome. The most promising prediction was with multivariable models, especially when oxygen saturation, or chest pain/dyspnea were included. CONCLUSION: Future studies should investigate combinations of tests in multivariable models (rather than single predictors) to improve identification of women at high risk of adverse outcomes in the setting of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.224 · 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