Mode of delivery in hemophilia: vaginal delivery and Cesarean section carry similar risks for intracranial hemorrhages and other major bleeds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The optimal mode of delivery for a pregnant hemophilia carrier is still a matter of debate. The aim of the study was to determine the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage and other major bleeds in neonates with moderate and severe hemophilia in relationship to mode of delivery and known family history. A total of 926 neonates, 786 with severe and 140 with moderate hemophilia were included in this PedNet multicenter study. Vaginal delivery was performed in 68.3% (n=633) and Cesarean section in 31.6% (n=293). Twenty intracranial hemorrhages (2.2%) and 44 other major bleeds (4.8%) occurred. Intracranial hemorrhages occurred in 2.4% of neonates following vaginal delivery compared to 1.7% after Cesarean section (P=not significant); other major bleeds occurred in 4.2% born by vaginal delivery and in 5.8% after Cesarean section (P=not significant). Further analysis of subgroups (n=813) identified vaginal delivery with instruments being a significant risk factor for both intracranial hemorrhages and major bleeds (Relative Risk: 4.78-7.39; P
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".