Thromboelastographic analysis of haemostasis in preeclamptic and normotensive pregnant women
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
: Pregnancy is a state of heightened coagulation, exacerbated in pathological conditions such as preeclampsia. We evaluated the role of thromboelastography (TEG), compared with standard haemostasis tests, in identifying in haemostatic alterations in normotensive pregnancies and pregnancies complicated with preeclampsia. Standard haemostasis tests and TEG were performed on 28 normotensive women and 31 with preeclampsia at delivery, 6 weeks and 6 months postpartum. Results were compared between patient groups, and at different collection times. Standard haemostasis tests failed to reveal consistent differences in haemostatic function between subject groups, mirroring the inconsistency described in the literature. TEG revealed increased coagulability in preeclampsia subjects compared with normotensive subjects at delivery. Haemostatic alterations were normalized by 6 weeks postpartum and remained stable at 6 months postpartum. TEG is superior to standard laboratory haemostatic tests in evaluating antenatal and postpartum haemostatic alterations associated with pregnancy complications such as 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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 it