MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Randomized Interventional Study on Prediction of Preeclampsia/Eclampsia in Women With Suspected Preeclampsia

2019· article· en· W2968068787 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Sofia Cerdeira, Joe M. O’Sullivan, Eric O. Ohuma, Deborah J. Harrington, Rebecca Black, Lucy Mackillop, Lawrence Impey, Catherine Greenwood, Tim James, Ian Smith, Aris T. Papageorghiou, Marian Knight, Manu Vatish

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsPreeclampsiaMedicinePlacental growth factorEclampsiaPregnancyObstetricsRandomized controlled trialProspective cohort studyClinical trialInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ratio of maternal serum sFlt-1 (soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1) to PlGF (placental growth factor) has been used retrospectively to rule out the occurrence of preeclampsia, a pregnancy hypertensive disorder, within 7 days in women presenting with clinical suspicion of preeclampsia. A prospective, interventional, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial evaluated the use of sFlt-1/PlGF ratio in women presenting with suspected preeclampsia. Women were assigned to reveal (sFlt-1/PlGF result known to clinicians) or nonreveal (result unknown) arms. A ratio cutoff of 38 was used to define low (≤38) and elevated risk (>38) of developing the condition in the subsequent week. The primary end point was hospitalization within 24 hours of the test. Secondary end points were development of preeclampsia and other adverse maternal-fetal outcomes. We recruited 370 women (186 reveal versus 184 nonreveal). Preeclampsia occurred in 85 women (23%). The number of admissions was not significantly different between groups (n=48 nonreveal versus n=60 reveal; P =0.192). The reveal trial arm admitted 100% of the cases that developed preeclampsia within 7 days, whereas the nonreveal admitted 83% ( P =0.038). Use of the test yielded a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 85.8–100) and a negative predictive value of 100% (95% CI, 97.1–100) compared with a sensitivity of 83.3 (95% CI, 58.6–96.4) and negative predictive value of 97.8 (95% CI, 93.7–99.5) with clinical practice alone. Use of the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio significantly improved clinical precision without changing the admission rate. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.isrctn.com . Unique identifier: ISRCTN87470468.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations148
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207