MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3089244097 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-72527-0

Development and validation of a prediction model on severe maternal outcomes among pregnant women with pre-eclampsia: a 10-year cohort study

2020· article· en· W3089244097 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Tan, Min Yang, Yana Qi, Yan Ren, Chunrong Liu, Shiyao Huang, Lehana Thabane, Xinghui Liu, Xin Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonImpact
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEclampsiaMedicineConfidence intervalBootstrapping (finance)Logistic regressionCohortPopulationMaternal deathCohort studyPregnancyObstetricsPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pre-eclampsia is a severe hypertensive disorder of pregnancy and could lead to severe maternal morbidities and death. Our study aimed to develop and validate a prognostic prediction model for severe maternal outcomes among Chinese population with pre-eclampsia. We conducted a 10-year cohort study in a referral center by collecting all pregnant women who diagnosed as pre-eclampsia and delivered from 2005 to 2014. A composite of severe maternal outcomes, including maternal near-miss defined by World Health Organization, cortical blindness/retinal detachment, temporary facial paralysis and maternal death, were adopted. We used logistic regression model to develop Model 1 by retaining the predictors of p < 0.05, and further conducted Model 2 by adding quadratic terms and interaction terms to Model 1. We undertook a bootstrapping validation and estimated the model performance. A total of 397 pregnant women suffered from severe maternal outcomes among 2,793 eligible participants, with an incidence of 14.21% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12.91%-15.51%). Of 13 predictors were finally selected in Model 1. Combined with quadratic and interactive terms, the Model 2 showed higher area under the ROC curve (82.2%, 95% CI 79.6%-84.7%) and good calibration. By the bootstrapping validation, similar model performances were present.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies→French-language works237,207→