MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2813834218 · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000002686

Long-Term Cognitive Impairment After Preeclampsia

2018· review· en· W2813834218 on OpenAlexaffabout
Malik Elharram, Natalie Dayan, Amanpreet Kaur, Tara Landry, Louise Pilote

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionMedicinePreeclampsiaObservational studyPregnancyMeta-analysisStrictly standardized mean differenceInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and summarize studies investigating an association between a history of preeclampsia and cognitive function later in life. DATA SOURCES: Studies published before August 2017 were identified without any language restriction or study design limits through electronic searches of 10 main databases including MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We considered all observational studies that included preeclampsia as a clearly defined prespecified risk factor and that examined a cognition-related outcome measure including validated cognitive tests, magnetic resonance brain imaging, or a clinical diagnosis of dementia. Study quality was assessed using the New-Castle Ottawa scale. All review stages were conducted independently by two reviewers, and disagreement was resolved by a third reviewer. Where possible, data were pooled using a random-effects model. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Of 3,126 potentially relevant studies, 13 were included in our review (1,314 women with prior preeclampsia and 289,080 women with prior normotensive pregnancy); median time since pregnancy was 6 years. A higher number of self-reported deficits in perception, memory, and motor functioning on the Cognitive Failure Questionnaire was reported in women with vs without prior preeclamptic pregnancies (Cognitive Failure Questionnaire mean total score 41.5 vs 36.8 out of 100, weighted mean difference of -5.1 points [-9.4 to -0.8]). Our meta-analysis did not reveal significant differences in studies assessing attention (Digit Symbol Substitution or Coding); however, women with preeclampsia performed worse on one of two meta-analyzed tests assessing memory (Letter Number Sequencing mean total score: 10.6 vs 10.1 out of 21, weighted mean difference of 0.63 points 0.06-1.2). Pooling of cognitive outcome measures for studies assessing brain imaging or a clinical diagnosis of dementia were limited by differences in reporting and marked heterogeneity between studies. CONCLUSION: Although preeclampsia is associated with subjective cognitive symptoms, our systematic review did not demonstrate clear evidence of impairment on standard neurocognitive tests. There is a paucity of high-quality studies assessing cognitive outcomes after preeclampsia.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations59
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207