MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Impact of Analgesic Intervention During the Second Stage of Labour: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2019· article· en· W2969503750 on OpenAlexaff
Aime Munro, Rosmy George, VM Allen

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetric Anesthesia Digest · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnalgesicCohortBolus (digestion)AnesthesiaFetusStage (stratigraphy)Vaginal deliveryObstetricsRetrospective cohort studyPain reliefPregnancySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

( Can J Anesth . 2018;65(11):1240–1247) The second stage of labor is made up of passive descent of the fetus as well as the active phase of maternal pushing. Because the duration of active pushing significantly impacts maternal and neonatal outcomes, a rest period has been advocated at full dilatation to allow the fetus to passively rotate and descend. A “top-up” or bolus of local anesthetic is occasionally provided to ameliorate breakthrough pain, thus reducing pain and ineffective pushing. In this study it was hypothesized that an epidural top-up to resolve inadequate analgesia in the second stage of labor may promote vaginal delivery.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.288 · 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.

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 venueObstetric Anesthesia DigestSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207