Endometriosis and Risk of Adverse Pregnancy Outcome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes the evidence for the association between endometriosis and adverse pregnancy outcome, including gestational hypertension, pre-eclampsia, low birth weight, and small for gestational age, preterm birth, placenta previa, placental abruption, cesarean section, stillbirth, postpartum hemorrhage, spontaneous hemoperitoneum in pregnancy, and spontaneous bowel perforation in pregnancy. METHODS: We performed the literature review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA), by searches in PubMed and EMBASE, until 1 November 2020 (PROSPERO ID CRD42020213999). We included peer-reviewed observational cohort studies and case-control studies and scored them according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, to assess the risk of bias and confounding. RESULTS: 39 studies were included. Women with endometriosis had an increased risk of gestational hypertension, pre-eclampsia, preterm birth, placenta previa, placental abruption, cesarean section, and stillbirth, compared to women without endometriosis. These results remained unchanged in sub-analyses, including studies on spontaneous pregnancies only. Spontaneous hemoperitoneum in pregnancy and bowel perforation seemed to be associated with endometriosis; however, the studies were few and did not meet the inclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The literature shows that endometriosis is associated with an increased risk of gestational hypertension, pre-eclampsia, preterm birth, placenta previa, placental abruption, cesarean section, and stillbirth.
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 | 0.016 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.030 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".