MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888941647 · doi:10.22374/cjgim.v13i3.199

Dyslipidemia Management after Pre-eclampsia: What is the Threshold for Treatment Due to Increased Cardiovascular Risk?

2018· article· en· W2888941647 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sheila Rodger, Winnie Sia

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of General Internal Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDyslipidemiaPreeclampsiaGuidelinePregnancyDiabetes mellitusMetabolic syndromeGestational diabetesObstetricsPostpartum periodInternal medicinePediatricsEndocrinologyGestation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Growing evidence shows that women with a history of pre-eclampsia, pregnancy-induced hypertension or gestational diabetes are at increased long-term risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This was incorporated in the American Heart Association’s 2011 guideline on the prevention of CVD in women and was recently reflected in the 2016 Canadian Cardiovascular Society’s guidelines, suggesting that young women who would not formerly have been considered for primary CVD prevention may benefit from screening for dyslipidemia. However, the indications and targets for medical treatment of dyslipidemia postpartum remain unclear and in fact differ amongst guidelines. We present the case of a 31-year-old G1P1L2 woman with pre-eclampsia, preterm delivery and dyslipidemia who had active vascular risk reduction postpartum, including adjustment of antihypertensives, diet and exercise counselling for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction and weight loss promotion, and consideration of an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor, which was ultimately decided against given the improvements seen with lifestyle modifications.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of General Internal MedicineSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207