MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963545438 · doi:10.1097/ogx.0000000000000692

Diagnosis and Management of Vasa Previa: A Comparison of 4 National Guidelines

2019· article· en· W2963545438 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and fetal healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsPrenatal diagnosisPregnancyFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance Vasa previa represents an uncommon and life-threatening condition for the fetus. The prenatal identification of the condition may improve the outcome. Objective The aim of this study was to synthesize and compare published evidence of 4 national guidelines on diagnosis and management of vasa previa. Evidence Acquisition A descriptive review of 4 recently published national guidelines on vasa previa was conducted: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists on “Vasa Praevia: Diagnosis and Management,” Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine on “Diagnosis and Management of Vasa Previa,” Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada on “Guidelines for the Management of Vasa Previa,” and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists on “Vasa Praevia.” These guidelines were compared regarding recommendations on diagnosis and management, while the quality of evidence was also reviewed based on each method of reporting. Results There were many similar recommendations in the compared guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management of vasa previa. Early prenatal diagnosis using ultrasound and color Doppler imaging, hospitalization or management as outpatients, and cesarean delivery in a tertiary center with experienced clinicians are the main recommendations. Conclusions Evidence-based guidelines may increase the awareness of the diagnosis and management of vasa previa among health care professionals and lead to more favorable perinatal outcomes. Target Audience Obstetricians and gynecologists, family physicians. Learning Objectives After participating in this activity, the learner should be better able to identify possible risk factors associated with vasa previa in pregnant women; describe the best diagnostic methods in pregnant women with vasa previa; and propose the appropriate management in cases of vasa previa.

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.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.223 · 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