MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914265631 · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31818-x

Prepregnancy and early pregnancy calcium supplementation among women at high risk of pre-eclampsia: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

2019· article· en· W2914265631 on OpenAlexfundno aff
G Justus Hofmeyr, Ana Pilar Betrán, Mandisa Singata‐Madliki, Gabriela Cormick, Stephen Munjanja, Susan Fawcus, Simpiwe Mose, David Hall, Armando Seuc, Theresa A Lawrie, Eduardo Bergel, James M. Roberts, Peter von Dadelszen, José M. Belizán, Fernando Althabe, Diane Sawchuck, Marianne Vidler, Saadiqa Allie, John Anthony, Karlyn Frank, Annmarie de Greeff, Sue Fawcus, Justus Hofmeyr, Mvuseleli Kovane, Nolundi Mshweshwe, Velisa Mqikela, Pamela Njikelana, Natalia Novikova, Adegboyega Oyebajo, Catherine Parker, Angel Phuti, Erika van Papendorp, Xoliswa Williams, Tina Dannemann, Laura A. Magee, France Donnay, Sharla Drebit, Jim Roberts, Bothwell Takaingofa Guzha, Emilia Makaza, Sarah Manyame, Eunice Tahuringana

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health, University of BergenSouth Australian Health and Medical Research InstituteUniversitetet i BergenUniversity of British ColumbiaUNICEFWorld Health OrganizationBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsEclampsiaMedicinePlaceboPregnancyGestationObstetricsGestational hypertensionRandomized controlled trialInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Reducing deaths from hypertensive disorders of pregnancy is a global priority. Low dietary calcium might account for the high prevalence of pre-eclampsia and eclampsia in low-income countries. Calcium supplementation in the second half of pregnancy is known to reduce the serious consequences of pre-eclampsia; however, the effect of calcium supplementation during placentation is not known. We aimed to test the hypothesis that calcium supplementation before and in early pregnancy (up to 20 weeks' gestation) prevents the development of pre-eclampsia METHODS: We did a multicountry, parallel arm, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Argentina. Participants with previous pre-eclampsia and eclampsia received 500 mg calcium or placebo daily from enrolment prepregnancy until 20 weeks' gestation. Participants were parous women whose most recent pregnancy had been complicated by pre-eclampsia or eclampsia and who were intending to become pregnant. All participants received unblinded calcium 1·5 g daily after 20 weeks' gestation. The allocation sequence (1:1 ratio) used computer-generated random numbers in balanced blocks of variable size. The primary outcome was pre-eclampsia, defined as gestational hypertension and proteinuria. The trial is registered with the Pan-African Clinical Trials Registry, number PACTR201105000267371. The trial closed on Oct 31, 2017. FINDINGS: Between July 12, 2011, and Sept 8, 2016, we randomly allocated 1355 women to receive calcium or placebo; 331 of 678 participants in the calcium group versus 320 of 677 in the placebo group became pregnant, and 298 of 678 versus 283 of 677 had pregnancies beyond 20 weeks' gestation. Pre-eclampsia occurred in 69 (23%) of 296 participants in the calcium group versus 82 (29%) of 283 participants in the placebo group with pregnancies beyond 20 weeks' gestation (risk ratio [RR] 0·80, 95% CI 0·61-1·06; p=0·121). For participants with compliance of more than 80% from the last visit before pregnancy to 20 weeks' gestation, the pre-eclampsia risk was 30 (21%) of 144 versus 47 (32%) of 149 (RR 0·66, CI 0·44-0·98; p=0·037). There were no serious adverse effects of calcium reported. INTERPRETATION: Calcium supplementation that commenced before pregnancy until 20 weeks' gestation, compared with placebo, did not show a significant reduction in recurrent pre-eclampsia. As the trial was powered to detect a large effect size, we cannot rule out a small to moderate effect of this intervention. FUNDING: The University of British Columbia, a grantee of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, WHO; the Argentina Fund for Horizontal Cooperation of the Argentinean Ministry of Foreign Affairs; and the Centre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations134
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe LancetSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207