MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091914509 · doi:10.1186/s13643-020-01444-0

The risk of cardiovascular disease in women after miscarriage, stillbirth, and therapeutic abortion: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3091914509 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charlotte Muehlschlegel, Harry Kyriacou, Abdulrahman Al-Mohammad, Lowri Foster-Davies, Fiona Simmons-Jones, Clare Oliver‐Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHomerton College, University of CambridgeUniversity of CambridgeNIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research CentreBritish Heart FoundationMedical Research CouncilCambridge University HospitalsNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineMiscarriageChecklistMeta-analysisSystematic reviewAbortionFunnel plotObservational studyCochrane LibraryCINAHLMEDLINEPublication biasPregnancyObstetricsDiseasePsychological interventionInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in women, responsible for approximately a third of all female deaths. Pregnancy complications are known to be associated with a greater risk of incident CVD in mothers. However, the relationships between pregnancy loss due to miscarriage, stillbirth, or therapeutic abortion, and future maternal cardiovascular health are under-researched. This study seeks to provide an up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between these three forms of pregnancy loss and the subsequent development of CVD. Methods This systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis checklist (PRISMA) and the Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) Checklist. A systematic search will be undertaken using publications identified in MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, Web of Knowledge, the CINAHL Nursing Database, and the Cochrane Library. The eligibility of each publication will be determined by predefined selection criteria. The quality of the included studies will be rated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled measures of association will be computed using random-effects model meta-analyses. Between-study heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic and the Cochrane χ2 statistic. Small study effects will be evaluated for meta-analyses with sufficient studies through the use of funnel plots and Egger’s test. Discussion The results of this systematic review will discuss the long-term risks of multiple types of cardiovascular disease in women who have experienced miscarriage, stillbirth, and/or therapeutic abortion. It will contribute to the growing field of cardio-obstetrics as the first to consider the full breadth of literature regarding the association between all forms of pregnancy loss and future maternal cardiovascular disease. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registration number [CRD42020167587]

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)0.094
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.125
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0940.125
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.039
Bibliometrics0.0150.014
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.007

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicCardiovascular Issues in PregnancyFrench-language works237,207