MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004857845 · doi:10.1186/s13063-019-3924-0

Health Pregnancy, Healthy Baby: testing the added benefits of pregnancy ultrasound scan for child development in a randomised control trial

2020· article· en· W3004857845 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Linda Richter, Wiedaad Slemming, Shane A. Norris, Alan Stein, Lucilla Poston, Dharmintra Pasupathy

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilPalix FoundationFundação Maria Cecilia Souto VidigalGrand Challenges CanadaBernard van Leer FoundationUBS Optimus FoundationDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaUniversity of OxfordKing's College LondonSouth African Medical Research CouncilBill and Melinda Gates FoundationAga Khan Foundation CanadaELMA FoundationAga Khan Foundation
KeywordsMedicineBreastfeedingAttendancePregnancyUltrasoundChild developmentObstetricsPediatricsPrenatal ultrasoundPrenatal careRandomized controlled trialFetusPrenatal diagnosisPopulationPsychiatrySurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The 2016 World Health Organization Antenatal Guidelines and the 2015 South African Maternal and Child Health Guidelines recommend one early antenatal ultrasound scan to establish gestational age and to detect multiple pregnancies and fetal abnormalities. Prior research indicates that ultrasound scan can also increase parental-fetal attachment. We aim to establish whether, compared to routine care, messages to promote parental attachment and healthy child development, conducted during one or two pregnancy ultrasound scans, improve early child development and growth, exclusive breastfeeding, parental-child interactions and prenatal and postnatal clinic attendance. METHODS: The effect of messages to sensitise mothers and fathers to fetal development will be tested in a three-armed randomised trial with 100 mothers and their partners from Soweto, Johannesburg in each arm. The primary outcome is child development at 6 months postnatally. Secondary outcomes include infant feeding, parental attachment and interaction, parental mental health and infant growth, assessed at 6 weeks and 6 months. Parents in Arm 1 receive a fetal ultrasound scan < 25 weeks during routine antenatal care at tertiary hospitals, and a second standard ultrasound scan at the research site within 2 weeks. Arm 2 participants receive the routine antenatal ultrasound scan and an additional ultrasound scan < 25 weeks at the research site, together with messages to promote parental attachment and healthy child development. Arm 3 participants receive the routine ultrasound scan and two additional ultrasound scans at the research site, < 25 weeks and < 36 weeks, together with messages to promote parental attachment and healthy child development. DISCUSSION: Evidence from high-income countries suggests that first-time prospective mothers and fathers enjoy seeing their fetus during ultrasound scan and that it is an emotional experience. A number of studies have found that ultrasound scan increases maternal attachment during pregnancy, a predictor of positive parent-infant interactions which, in turn, promotes healthy infant development. It is generally agreed that studies are needed which follow up parental-child behaviour and healthy child development postnatally, include fathers and examine the construct in a wider diversity of settings, especially in low and middle-income countries. Testing the added benefits of pregnancy ultrasound scan for child development is a gap that the proposed trial in South Africa seeks to address. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR201808107241133. Registered on 15 August 2018.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.371
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

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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207