MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sympathetic Nervous System Regulation in Human Normotensive and Hypertensive Pregnancies

2018· review· en· W2793747662 on OpenAlexaff
Laura M. Reyes, Charlotte W. Usselman, Margie H. Davenport, Craig D. Steinback

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinesiologyRecreationPregnancyMedicineDiabetes mellitusObstetricsGerontologyPhysical therapyEndocrinologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The progression from conception through to the postpartum period represents an extraordinary period of physiological adaptation in the mother to support the growth and development of the fetus. Cardiometabolic dysregulation during this period is associated with the future development of cardiovascular morbidity.1 In particular, hypertensive pregnancy disorders, including gestational hypertension (GH) and preeclampsia, are the leading causes of maternal–fetal morbidity and mortality in the developed world, including North America.2 In the 10 to 14 years after pregnancy, women who have had preeclampsia also demonstrate an elevated risk for hypertension (risk ratio, 3.70), ischemic heart disease (risk ratio, 2.26), stroke (risk ratio, 1.8),3 and end-stage renal disease (risk ratio, 4.7)4 compared with women who had normotensive pregnancies. However, the most sobering statistic identifies preeclampsia as an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease death (hazard ratio, 2.14) that is further elevated with earlier onset of preeclampsia (hazard ratio, 9.54 for diagnosis by 34 weeks gestation).5 The 30-year survival rate for these women at a median age of 56 years is only 86%.5 This elevated risk is believed to be related to persistent cardiovascular dysfunction.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations80
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207