MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089665205 · doi:10.1111/aogs.14011

Birth outcomes in women with body mass index of 40 kg/m<sup>2</sup> or greater stratified by planned and actual mode of birth: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

2020· review· en· W3089665205 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rohan D’Souza, Ivan Horyn, Claude‐Emilie Jacob, Nusrat Zaffar, Daphne Horn, Cynthia Maxwell

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and fetal healthcare
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecMount Sinai HospitalLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRelative riskMeta-analysisBody mass indexObstetricsConfidence intervalGynecologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Pregnant women with a body mass index (BMI) ≥40 kg/m2 are at an increased risk of requiring planned‐ and unplanned cesarean deliveries (CD). The aim of this systematic review is to compare outcomes in women with BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 based on planned and actual mode of birth. Material and Methods Five databases were searched for English and French‐language publications until February 2019, and all studies reporting on delivery outcomes in women with BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2, stratified by planned and actual mode of birth, were included. Risk‐of‐bias was assessed using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random‐effects meta‐analysis. Results Ten observational studies were included. Anticipated vaginal birth vs planned CD (5 studies, n = 2216) was associated with higher risk for postpartum hemorrhage (13.0% vs 4.1%, P < .001, numbers needed to harm (NNH = 11), I2 = 0%) but lower risk for wound complications (7.6% vs 14.5%, P < .001, numbers needed to treat (NNT = 15), I2 = 58.3%). Planned trial of labor vs repeat CD (3 studies, n = 4144) was associated with higher risk for uterine dehiscence (0.94% vs 0.42%, P = .04, NNH = 200, I2 = 0%), endometritis (5.1% vs 2.2%, P < .001, NNH = 35, I2 = 0%), prolonged hospitalization (one study, 30.3% vs 26.0%, P = .003, NNH = 23), low five‐minute Apgar scores (4.9% vs 1.7%, RR 2.95 (2.03, 4.28), NNH = 30, I2 = 0%) and birth trauma (1.1% vs 0.2%, P < .001, NNH = 111, I2 = 0%). Successful vaginal birth vs intrapartum CD (n = 3625) was associated with lower risk of postpartum hemorrhage (15.1% vs 70%, P < .001, NNT = 2, I2 = 0%), wound complications (one study, 0% vs 4.4%, P = .007, NNT = 23), prolonged hospitalization (one study, 1.9% vs 6.7%, 0.04, NNT = 21) and low five‐minute Apgar scores (one study, 1.0% vs 5.6%, P = .03, NNT = 22), but more birth trauma (5.9% vs 0.6%, P = .005, NNH = 19, I2 = 0%). Compared groups had dissimilar demographic characteristics. Although studies scored 6‐7/9 on risk‐of‐bias assessment, they were at high‐risk for confounding by indication. Conclusions Evidence from observational studies suggests clinical equipoise regarding the optimal mode of delivery in women with BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 and no prior CD. This question is best answered by a randomized trial. Based on an unplanned subgroup analysis, for women with BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 and prior CD, repeat CD may be associated with better clinical outcomes.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.032
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica ScandinavicaSame topicMaternal and fetal healthcareFrench-language works237,207