MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Defining Failed Induction of Labor

2018· article· en· W2901214997 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William A. Grobman, Jennifer L. Bailit, Ying‐Cheng Lai, Uma M. Reddy, Ronald J. Wapner, Michael W. Varner, John M. Thorp, Kenneth J. Leveno, Steve N. Caritis, Madhva Prasad, Alan Tita, George R. Saade, Yoram Sorokin, Dwight J. Rouse, SC Blackwell, Jorge E. Tolosa

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetric Anesthesia Digest · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at HoustonUniversity of South CarolinaNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentDrexel UniversityEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentGeorge Washington UniversityUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillKaiser PermanenteCase Western Reserve UniversityNorthShore University HealthSystemUniversity of PittsburghNorthwestern UniversityOhio State University
KeywordsMedicineInduction of laborQuarter (Canadian coin)Labor inductionObstetricsPopulationPreterm laborGynecologyPregnancyFetusEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

( Am J Obstet Gynecol . 2018;218:122.e1–122.e8) Labor is induced in approximately a quarter of pregnant women. When a laboring patient spends an extended period of time in the latent phase, clinicians must decide whether it would be beneficial to continue labor. There is no consensus on the criteria for labeling labor as “failed,” which is important in decreasing unnecessary cesarean deliveries. This study aimed to analyze the maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with the length of the latent phase of labor in a large population of nulliparous women.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.779

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetric Anesthesia DigestSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207