MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910123597 · doi:10.1139/cjpp-2018-0380

Cyclooxygenase inhibitors for treating preterm labour: What is the molecular evidence?

2019· article· en· W2910123597 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Daniela Urrego, Anthony Cuthbert Liwa, William C. Cole, Stephen Wood, Donna M. Slater

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPreterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreterm labourMedicineCyclooxygenaseGestationFetusTocolytic agentPregnancyPreterm laborObstetricsEnzymeBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preterm birth (<37 weeks of gestation) significantly increases the risk of neonatal mortality and morbidity. As many as half of all preterm births occur following spontaneous preterm labour. Since in such cases there are no known reasons for the initiation of labour, treatment of preterm labour (tocolysis) has sought to stop labour contractions and delay delivery. Despite some success, the use of cyclooxygenase (COX) inhibitors is associated with maternal/fetal side effects, and possibly increased risk of preterm birth. Clinical use of these drugs predates the collection of molecular and biochemical evidence in vitro, examining the expression and activity of COX enzymes in pregnant uterine tissues with and without labour. Such evidence is important to the rationale that COX enzymes are, or are not, appropriate targets for the tocolysis. The current study systematically searched existing scientific evidence to address the hypothesis that COX expression/activity is increased with the onset of human labour, in an effort to determine whether there is a rationale for the use of COX inhibitors as tocolytics. Our review identified 44 studies, but determined that there is insufficient evidence to support or refute a role of COX-1/-2 in the onset of preterm labour that supports COX-targeted tocolysis.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.282
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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicPreterm Birth and ChorioamnionitisFrench-language works237,207