MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098927270 · doi:10.1101/2020.11.08.20228056

Protocol for a sequential, prospective meta-analysis to describe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the pregnancy and postpartum periods

2020· preprint· en· W3098927270 on OpenAlexaff
Emily R. Smith, Erin Oakley, Siran He, Rebecca Zavala, Kacey Ferguson, Lior Miller, Gargi Wable Grandner, Ibukun‐Oluwa Omolade Abejirinde, Yalda Afshar, Homa K. Ahmadzia, Grace M. Aldrovandi, Victor Akelo, Beth A. Tippett Barr, Elisa Bevilacqua, Justin S. Brandt, Natalie Broutet, Irene Fernández‐Buhigas, J. Carrillo, Rebecca G. Clifton, Jeanne A. Conry, Erich Cosmi, Camille Delgado‐López, Hema Divakar, Amanda J. Driscoll, Guillaume Favre, Valerie J. Flaherman, Chris Gale, Christine L. Godwin, Sami L. Gottlieb, Olivia Hernandez Bellolio, Edna Kara, Sammy Khagayi, Caron Rahn Kim, Marian Knight, Karen L. Kotloff, Antonio L’Abbate, Kirsty Le Doaré, C. Lees, Ethan Litman, Erica M. Lokken, Valentina Laurita Longo, Laura A. Magee, R.J. Martinez‐Portilla, Elizabeth M. McClure, Torri D. Metz, Deborah Money, Edward Mullins, Jean B. Nachega, Alice Panchaud, Rebecca Playle, Liona C. Poon, Daniel J. Raiten, Lesley Regan, Gordon Rukundo, José Enrique Sanín-Blair, Marleen Temmerman, Anna Thorson, Soe Soe Thwin, Jorge E. Tolosa, Julia Townson, Miguel Valencia‐Prado, Silvia Visentin, Peter von Dadelszen, Kristina M. Adams Waldorf, Clare Whitehead, Huixia Yang, Kristian Thorlund, James M. Tielsch

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Impact on Reproduction
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpactUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisProtocol (science)Best practiceData sharingMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PregnancyPandemicData collectionObservational studyAccrualMEDLINEEpidemiologyAggregate dataFamily medicineDiseaseAlternative medicinePolitical scienceInfectious disease (medical specialty)BusinessAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We urgently need answers to basic epidemiological questions regarding SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant and postpartum women and its effect on their newborns. While many national registries, health facilities, and research groups are collecting relevant data, we need a collaborative and methodologically rigorous approach to better combine these data and address knowledge gaps, especially those related to rare outcomes. We propose that using a sequential, prospective meta-analysis (PMA) is the best approach to generate data for policy- and practice-oriented guidelines. As the pandemic evolves, additional studies identified retrospectively by the steering committee or through living systematic reviews will be invited to participate in this PMA. Investigators can contribute to the PMA by either submitting individual patient data or running standardized code to generate aggregate data estimates. For the primary analysis, we will pool data using two-stage meta-analysis methods. The meta-analyses will be updated as additional data accrue in each contributing study and as additional studies meet study-specific time or data accrual thresholds for sharing. At the time of publication, investigators of 25 studies, including more than 76,000 pregnancies, in 41 countries had agreed to share data for this analysis. Among the included studies, 12 have a contemporaneous comparison group of pregnancies without COVID-19, and four studies include a comparison group of non-pregnant women of reproductive age with COVID-19. Protocols and updates will be maintained publicly. Results will be shared with key stakeholders, including the World Health Organization (WHO) Maternal, Newborn, Child, and Adolescent Health (MNCAH) Research Working Group. Data contributors will share results with local stakeholders. Scientific publications will be published in open-access journals on an ongoing basis.

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)0.098
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.237
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0980.237
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.023
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1040.014

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 head0.336
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.142 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
DomainMethods
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicCOVID-19 Impact on ReproductionFrench-language works237,207