Uterotonics in elective caesarean delivery: a randomised non‐inferiority study comparing carbetocin 20 μg and 100 μg
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postpartum haemorrhage is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide and prophylactic uterotonic drug administration after the delivery of the infant is advised. Carbetocin is recommended as an uterotonic, but the minimum effective dose has not been verified. We compared the efficacy of two doses of intravenous carbetocin (20 μg and 100 μg) in women undergoing elective caesarean delivery. This was a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority study in women at low risk of postpartum haemorrhage. Carbetocin was administered on delivery of the anterior shoulder of the neonate. Uterine tone was assessed by the obstetrician 2 min and 5 min after carbetocin administration according to an 11-point numerical rating scale (0 = atonic uterus and 10 = firm uterus). The primary outcome was uterine tone 2 min after carbetocin administration. The pre-specified non-inferiority margin was 1 point on the 11-point scale. Secondary outcomes included: uterine tone at 5 min; use of additional uterotonics within 24 h; blood loss; and adverse effects. Data were available for 53 women in the carbetocin-20 group and for 55 women in the carbetocin-100 group. The mean (SD) uterine tone at 2 min was 7.5 (1.9) in the carbetocin-20 group and 8.0 (1.5) in the carbetocin-100 group. The lower limit of the one-sided 95%CI for the mean difference was outside the non-inferiority margin (at -1.1; p = 0.11) meaning non-inferiority of carbetocin 20 μg compared with carbetocin 100 μg could not be confirmed. However, the secondary outcome measures of uterine tone at 5 min, blood loss and use of additional uterotonics were similar in both groups.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".