Management of Twin Pregnancies: A Comparative Review of National and International Guidelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance Twin pregnancies are associated with a higher risk of perinatal mortality and morbidity compared with singleton and require more intensive prenatal care. Objective The aim of this study was to review and compare the recommendations from published guidelines on twin pregnancies. Evidence Acquisition A descriptive review of guidelines from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of the Royal College of Physicians of Ireland, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists on the management of twin pregnancies was conducted. Results All the guidelines highlight the importance of an accurate assessment of chorionicity, amnionicity, and gestational age in the first trimester. They also recommend the performance of nuchal translucency and a detailed anomaly scan. The ultrasound surveillance protocol is similar in all guidelines, that is, every 2 weeks for monochorionic and every 4 weeks for dichorionic twins. On the other hand, there are differences regarding the timing and mode of delivery, especially in monochorionic diamniotic twins, in the definition and management of fetal growth discordance, the use of cervical length to screen for preterm birth, and the timing of corticosteroids' administration. Conclusions The differences in the reviewed guidelines on the management of twin pregnancies highlight the need for an adoption of an international consensus, in order to improve perinatal outcomes of twin pregnancies. Target Audience Obstetricians and gynecologists, family physicians Learning Objectives After participating in this activity, the learner should be better able to identify all aspects of the antenatal surveillance of twin pregnancies and the importance of first trimester determination of chorionicity; explain the birth issues of twin pregnancies, including recommendations on mode and timing of delivery; and describe the possible complications in pregnancy, their association with chorionicity, and appropriate management.
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 | 0.014 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".