Development and internal validation of a model predicting severe maternal morbidity using variables available pre-conception and in early pregnancy: a population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To improve the prediction of maternal end-organ injury or death using routinely-collected variables from the pre-pregnancy and the early pregnancy period. Design: Population-based cohort study using linked administrative health data. Setting: Ontario, Canada, April 1, 2006 to March 31, 2014. Sample: Women aged 18-60 years with a livebirth or stillbirth, of which one birth was randomly selected per woman. Methods and main outcome measures: We constructed a CPM for the primary composite outcome of any maternal end-organ injury or death, arising between 20 weeks’ gestation and 42 days after the birth hospital discharge date. Our CPM included variables collected from 12 months before estimated conception until 19 weeks’ gestation. We developed a separate CPM for parous women to allow for the inclusion of factors from previous pregnancy(ies). Results: Of 634,290 women, 1969 experienced the primary composite outcome (3.1 per 1000). Predictive factors in the main CPM included maternal world region of origin, chronic medical conditions, parity, and obstetrical/perinatal issues – with moderate model discrimination (C-statistic 0.68, 95% CI 0.66-0.69). Among 333,435 parous women, the C-statistic was 0.71 (0.69-0.73) in the model using variables from the current (index) pregnancy as well as pre-pregnancy predictors and variables from any previous pregnancy. Conclusions: A combination of factors ascertained early in pregnancy through a basic medical history help to identify women at risk for severe morbidity, who may benefit from targeted preventive and surveillance strategies including appropriate specialty-based antenatal care pathways. Further refinement of this model would enable clinical use.
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 | 0.046 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".