A250 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW WITH META-ANALYSIS: ADVERSE PREGNANCY-RELATED OUTCOMES WITH INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic inflammatory condition. While it is reported that IBD may result in adverse pregnancy-related outcomes, its effects on placental related diseases are relatively not known. Aims The aim of our work was to determine the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in patients with IBD. Methods Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library were searched for studies that reported adverse maternal and obstetrical outcomes in patients with IBD. Weighted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the risk of these outcomes in patients with IBD compared to healthy controls. Results Fifty-three studies were included (7917 patients with IBD and 3253 healthy controls). Cesarean delivery was more common in patients with IBD compared to healthy controls (OR 1.79, 95% CI, 1.16–2.77). This remained significant for UC (OR 1.80, 95% CI, 1.21–2.90) but not CD (OR 1.48, 95% CI, 0.94–2.34). Similarly, gestational diabetes occurred more commonly in IBD (OR 2.96, 95% CI, 1.47–5.98). Furthermore, the incidences of placental diseases were low, 2.0% (95% CI, 0.9–3.1%) for pre-eclampsia, 3.3% (95% CI, 0–7.2%) for placental abruption, 0.5% (95% CI, 0.2–0.9%) for placenta previa, and 0.3% (95% CI, 0–0.5%) for chorioamnionitis. Finally, patients with IBD were more likely to experience preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM, OR 12.10, 95% CI, 2.15–67.98), but not an early pregnancy loss (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.49–5.43). Anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy was not associated with chorioamnionitis (OR 1.12, 95% CI, 0.16–7.67), early pregnancy loss (OR 1.49, 95% CI, 0.83- 2.64), and placenta previa (OR 1.58, 95% CI, 0.30–8.47). Conclusions Patients with IBD are more likely to develop adverse pregnancy-related outcomes such as Gestational Diabetes and PPROM. Pregnancy in patients with IBD should be considered a high-risk period and as such, a multi-disciplinary team, including gastroenterologists, obstetricians and maternal-fetal medicine specialists, is necessary to recognize and effectively manage adverse obstetrical outcomes in order to reduce overall morbidity and mortality. Funding Agencies None
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.037 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".