Incidence of Syncope During Pregnancy: Temporal Trends and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background We examined temporal trends, timing, and frequency, as well as adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes occurring in the first year postpartum among women experiencing syncope during pregnancy. Methods and Results This was a retrospective study of pregnancies between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2014, in the province of Alberta, Canada. Of 481 930 pregnancies, 4667 had an episode of syncope. Poisson regression analysis found a 5% increase/year (rate ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.04-1.06) in the age-adjusted incidence of syncope. Overall, 1506 (32.3%) of the syncope episodes first occurred in the first trimester, 2058 (44.1%) in the second trimester, and 1103 (23.6%) in the third trimester; and 8% (n=377) of pregnancies had >1 episode of syncope. Compared with women without syncope, women who experienced syncope were younger (age <25 years; 34.7% versus 20.8%; P<0.001), and primiparous (52.1% versus 42.4%; P<0.001). The rate of preterm birth was higher in pregnancies with syncope during the first trimester (18.3%), compared with the second (15.8%) and third trimesters (14.2%) and pregnancies without syncope (15.0%; P<0.01). The incidence of congenital anomalies among children born of pregnancies with multiple syncope episodes was significantly higher (4.9%) compared with children of pregnancies without syncope (2.9%; P<0.01). Within 1 year after delivery, women with syncope during pregnancy had higher rates of cardiac arrhythmias and syncope episodes than women with no syncope during pregnancy. Conclusions Pregnant women with syncope, especially when the syncopal event occurs during the first trimester, may be at a higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes as well as an increased incidence of cardiac arrhythmia and syncope postpartum.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".