MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954561849 · doi:10.14740/jcgo.v0i0.540

Tendency Prediction for Atonic Bleeding Following a Problem-Free Pregnancy

2019· article· en· W2954561849 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Atsushi Yanaihara, Shouta Hatakeyama, Shirei Ougi, Aguri Hirano, T Yanaihara

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and Obstetrics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEctopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsPregnancyConfidence intervalBlood lossIncidence (geometry)In vitro fertilisationGynecologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The incidence of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) has increased globally; however, the reasons for this are largely unknown. PPH is potentially fatal and atonic PPH can occur even in low-risk pregnancies. In this study, we aimed to identify the causes of atonic bleeding following a problem-free pregnancy. Methods: One thousand, four hundred sixty-six patients with problem-free pregnancies who experienced total bleeding 2 h after vaginal delivery were divided into two groups based on the amount of blood loss: control group (n = 1,325), with a blood loss of < 800 mL and study group (n = 141) with a blood loss of ≥ 800 mL. Several factors that may correlate with atonic bleeding were divided into three groups: maternal demographic (MD) factors, intrapartum factors, and fatal factors. Comparisons were made between the control group and study group regarding these factors. A multivariate analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were performed to identify the independent risk factors for atonic bleeding. The continuous net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) were also calculated. Results: The independent factors being statistically significant that predicted over 800 mL of atonic bleeding were in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) pregnancies (adjusted odd ratio (OR): 3.63; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.46 - 5.36; P < 0.001), new-born weight (adjusted OR: 1.0016; 95% CI: 1.0011 - 1.0022; P < 0.001), and the cases of instrumental labor (IL) (adjusted OR: 2.48; 95% CI: 1.64 - 3.77; P < 0.001). ROCs for the final model (area under the curve (AUC): 0.765; 95% CI: 0.724 - 0.806), fatal model (AUC: 0.675; 95% CI: 0.627 - 0.723), intrapartum model (AUC: 0.654; 95% CI: 0.612 - 0.696) and MD model (AUC: 0.615; 95% CI: 0.575 - 0.656) were constructed. The NRI and IDI were 0.733 (95% CI: 0.565 - 0.901; P < 0.0001) and 0.073 (95% CI: 0.051 - 0.90; P < 0.0001) in the fatal model and final model, 0.057 (95% CI: -0.117 - 0.230; P = 0.288) and 0.015 (95% CI: -0.004 - 0.034; P = 0.521) in the MD model, and -0.146 (95% CI: -0.319 - 0.027; P = 0.098) and -0.003 (95% CI: -0.021 - 0.014; P = 0.700) in the intrapartum model. Conclusions: We concluded that IVF/ICSI pregnancies, new-born weight, and IL were independent factors contributing to atonic bleeding. The coincidence of these three factors significantly predicts the likelihood of atonic bleeding. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2019;8(2):39-43 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jcgo540

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and ObstetricsSame topicEctopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207