Stillbirth in Canada: anachronistic definition and registration processes impede public health surveillance and clinical care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The archaic definition and registration processes for stillbirth currently prevalent in Canada impede both clinical care and public health. The situation is fraught because of definitional problems related to the inclusion of induced abortions at ≥20 weeks' gestation as stillbirths: widespread uptake of prenatal diagnosis and induced abortion for serious congenital anomalies has resulted in an artefactual temporal increase in stillbirth rates in Canada and placed the country in an unfavourable position in international (stillbirth) rankings. Other problems with the Canadian stillbirth definition and registration processes extend to the inclusion of fetal reductions (for multi-fetal pregnancy) as stillbirths, and the use of inconsistent viability criteria for reporting stillbirth. This paper reviews the history of stillbirth registration in Canada, provides a rationale for updating the definition of fetal death and recommends a new definition and improved processes for fetal death registration. The recommendations proposed are intended to serve as a starting point for reformulating issues related to stillbirth, with the hope that building a consensus regarding a definition and registration procedures will facilitate clinical care and public health.
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 | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".