Severe and critical COVID-19 in pregnancy: A case series from Montreal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Optimal obstetric management for women with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is not known. We describe the management of six pregnant women requiring in-hospital care for severe COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify pregnant women who tested positive for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) between 15 March and 30 June 2020. A subset of women meeting criteria for severe COVID-19 was included. RESULTS: Four women required non-invasive supplemental oxygen therapy and two required mechanical ventilation. Four women were discharged from hospital undelivered and two required preterm delivery. One woman had a pulmonary embolism, and two required re-admission for worsening symptoms. CONCLUSION: Management of pregnant women with severe COVID-19 is complex and should involve multidisciplinary expertise. Avoiding early delivery may be a safe option. We recommend an individualized approach to care, including careful consideration of the expected risks and benefits of expectant obstetric management versus delivery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".