Intrauterine Bakri balloon for management of postpartum hemorrhage using multicenter data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the effect of intrauterine Bakri balloon for the management of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH). Methods: This prospective cohort study included all women with postpartum bleeding who underwent intrauterine Bakri balloon from November 2018 to September 2019 in 31 tertiary public hospitals in China. Women were divided in four groups according to the blood loss before using the intrauterine Bakri balloon. Maternal characteristics, laboratory indices, medical/surgical interventions and maternal outcomes were recorded. Results: Overall, 732 women treated by Bakri balloon to control bleeding and 720 women were enrolled (180 after vaginal delivery and 540 during or after cesarean delivery). The success rate was 97.6% (17/720). The group with a hemorrhage ≥ 1000 mL before using Bakri balloon had significantly more blood loss after balloon insertion (562.74 ±628.565 ml) compared with other three groups (230.38 i?± 206.856 ml, 328.92 i?±i? 347.429 ml and 487.93 ± 554.007 ml) (P < 0.05). The maternal hemoglobin (97.11 ± 21.13 g/L) was lower than that in the group with hemorrhage ≤400 ml (110.83 ± 14.98 g/L), 401-800 ml group (111.26 ± 15.21g/L), 800 - 1000 ml group (108.99 ±21.09 g/L). Conclusion: The early usage of the Bakri balloon is more effective for the management of PPH. Biography: Huili Zhang got her Ph.D. degree from Guangzhou medical university, during this time she worked on the newborn lung disease at MGH for two years. After graduation, she is working as a grade two resident in obstetrics and gynecology at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University. As a resident, she has trained how to treat women during prenatal and postnatal periods, deliver infant, perform cesarean section or other surgical procedure as needed to preserve patients’ health deliver infant safely. In addition, she has no difficulty communicating in English with her foreign friends as her teachers come from Canada, America and the UK. She is also skilled in reading documents relating to clinical and scientific research. In her free time, she enjoys playing basketball, jogging and cycling by the park
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".