RETRACTED ARTICLE: Prediction of intraperitoneal adhesions using striae gravidarum and scar characteristics in women undergoing repeated cesarean sections
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The current fact of increasing rates of cesarean deliveries is a catastrophe. Recurrent cesareans result in intraperitoneal adhesions that would lead to maternal morbidity during delivery. Great efforts are directed towards the prediction of intraperitoneal adhesions to provide the best care for laboring women. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the role of abdominal striae and cesarean scar characters in the prediction of intraperitoneal adhesions. METHODS: This was a case- control study conducted in the emergency ward of the obstetrics and gynecology department of a tertiary hospital from June to December 2019. The study was carried on patients admitted to the ward fulfilling particular inclusion and exclusion criteria. The study included two groups, group one was assessed for the presence of striae, and the degree of intraperitoneal adhesions was evaluated during the current cesarean section. Group two included patients without evidence of abdominal striae. They were evaluated for the severity of adhesions also after evaluation of the previous scar. Evaluation of the striae was done using Davey's scoring system. The scar was assessed using the Vancouver Scar Scale. The modified Nair's scoring system was used to evaluate intraperitoneal adhesions. RESULTS: The study group included 203 women, while the control group included 205 women. There were significant differences in the demographic characters of the recruited patients (p-value 0.001 for almost all variables). The mean Davey score in those with mild, moderate, and severe striae was 1.82 ± 0.39, 3.57 ± 0.5, and 6.73 ± 0.94, respectively (p-value < 0.001). Higher scores for the parameters of the Vancouver scale were present in patients with severe striae (1.69 ± 1.01, 1.73 ± 0.57, 2.67 ± 1.23, and 1.35 ± 1.06 for scar vascularity, pigmentation, pliability, and height respectively with a p-value of < 0.001 each). Thick intraperitoneal adhesions were noted significantly in women with severe striae [21 (43.75%), p-value < 0.001)]. The Davey's and Vancouver scores showed highly significant predictive performance in the prediction of intraperitoneal adhesions (p-value < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Abdominal striae and cesarean scar were significant predictors for intraperitoneal adhesions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".