Can we predict and prevent emergency department visits for postpartum hypertensive complications in patients with hypertensive disorders in pregnancy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are major causes of maternal mortality and morbidity, and postpartum hypertensive complications have significant implications on maternal health and public health care system. Antepartum community care programs for hypertension are in place at major centers of Canada, however, such a program for postpartum are usually lacking, and could be a cost-effective solution to reduce postpartum hypertensive complications.Objectives: To assess the proportion of women who present to the emergency department (ED) or outpatient clinics for postpartum hypertensive (PPHTN) complications up to 6 weeks postpartum, among pregnancies complicated by antenatal hypertensive disorders in Calgary, Canada. Secondary objectives were to identify risk factors for PPHTN complications, and to perform a cost-benefit analysis to support postpartum community care program (PCCP) as a way to decrease ED and clinic visits for PPHTN complications, and thus has a favorable economic impact on the public health care system.Study design: Retrospective cohort study using administrative databases, followed by chart review of ED visits to confirm diagnoses and estimate cost of visits and admissions. The participants were women followed by the Calgary Antenatal Community Care Program (ACCP) for hypertensive disorders, from 2014 to 2015, inclusive. The primary outcome was ED or clinic visit associated with an outpatient database record of hypertensive disorder diagnosis, within 42 days postpartum.Results: Among 319 deliveries included in the study, 30 women (9.4, 95%CI: 6.2–12.6%) visited ED or clinics for PPHTN. We identified multiple antihypertensive medication uses and abnormal postpartum gestational hypertension labs as risk factors for ED visit among these women. We estimate a CAD$152 per antenatal hypertensive patient cost benefit for PCCP.Conclusion: The proposed PCCP appears to have an economic benefit to health care system with a decrease in ED and clinic visits. Further studies with greater sample size could strengthen the findings in this study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".