MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Correlation between obstetric outcome and amniotic fluid index (AFI) in preterm prelabour rupture of membranes (PPROM)

2018· article· en· W2903286907 on OpenAlexaff
Anusree Saraswathy, Jayshree V. Vaman, Mayadevi Brahmanandan, C Nirmala

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Reproduction Contraception Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPreterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
Canadian institutionsASTER
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAmniotic fluid indexObstetricsPremature rupture of membranesGestational ageRupture of membranesAmniotic fluidNeonatal sepsisGestationExact testPlacental abruptionPregnancyGynecologyFetusSepsisSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The purpose was to determine whether AFI<5 cm after preterm premature rupture of the membranes (PPROM) is associated with an increased risk of maternal and perinatal morbidity.Methods: We performed a prospective case control study of 161 singleton pregnancies complicated by preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes (PPROM) in whom AFI was assessed. Patients were categorized in two groups on the basis of amniotic fluid index- AFI<5 cm or AFI ≥ 5 cm. Categorical data were tested for significance with the χ2 and Fisher exact tests. All 2-sided p values < 0.05 were considered significant.Results: Both groups were similar with respect to selected demographics, gestational age atrupture of the membranes, gestational age at the delivery, birth weight. Both groups were similar with respect to maternal chorio-amnionitis, abruption, mode of delivery, early onset neonatal sepsis and NICU stay. Patients with AFI<5 cm demonstrated greater frequency of C/S delivery for non-reassuring fetal tests.Conclusions: There is no significant difference between obstetric outcome in AFI<5 and AFI> 5 after PPROM between 24- and 37-weeks’ gestation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Reproduction Contraception Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicPreterm Birth and ChorioamnionitisFrench-language works237,207