MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016965209 · doi:10.17816/jowd6917-16

Cognitive function of pregnant women: the problem of postoperative cognitive dysfunction in women after labor

2020· article· en· W3016965209 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aleksey V. Shchegolev, Д М Широков, Oksana A. Chernykh, I. V. Vartanova, Maria V. Khrabrova

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of obstetrics and women s diseases · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentWechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleAnxietyAffect (linguistics)Test (biology)Depression (economics)Clinical psychologyPsychiatryCognitive impairmentPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of postoperative cognitive dysfunction is relevant in obstetrics due to the initial psychophysiological state of a pregnant woman and the high frequency of abdominal delivery everywhere. When choosing the optimal method of anesthesia for a cesarean section, which would minimally affect cognitive functions, it is necessary to consider the impact of anesthesia on the memory and attention of puerperas, as well as their initial cognitive status. To assess memory and attention in women of reproductive age, in our opinion, the most appropriate tests are the MoCA-test, Benton test, Wechsler test, hospital anxiety and depression scale, and a self-assessment questionnaire. These tests are recommended by psychophysiologists and have proven themselves to be well applied in daily clinical practice. Standard test kits with a formalized (quantitative) evaluation of the results allow a rapid assessment of several cognitive functions in a limited time. This review article presents the problem of the cognitive function of pregnant women and postoperative cognitive dysfunction during pregnancy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of obstetrics and women s diseasesSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207