MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158846710 · doi:10.1186/s12884-021-03938-8

Assisted reproductive technology and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: systematic review and meta-analyses

2021· review· en· W3158846710 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
FundersInstitute of Human Development, Child and Youth HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchQueen's University
KeywordsMedicineIntracytoplasmic sperm injectionOdds ratioAssisted reproductive technologyPregnancyObstetricsPreeclampsiaReproductive medicineIn vitro fertilisationEmbryo transferMeta-analysisGynecologyCochrane LibraryLive birthRelative riskConfidence intervalReproductive technologyInfertilityInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) is one of the most common pregnancy complications and causes of maternal morbidity and mortality. Assisted reproductive technology (ART) has been associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, including HDP. However, the impact of multiple pregnancies, oocyte donation, as well as fresh and frozen embryo transfer needs to be further studied. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses to evaluate the association between ART and HDP or preeclampsia relative to spontaneous conception (SC). Methods We identified studies from EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library (up to April 8, 2020) and manually using structured search strategies. Cohort studies that included pregnancies after in vitro fertilization (IVF) with or without intracytoplasmic sperm fertilization (ICSI) relative to SC with HDP or preeclampsia as the outcome of interest were included. The control group was women who conceived spontaneously without ART or fertility medications. The pooled results were reported in odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals based on random effects models. Numbers needed to harm (NNH) were calculated based on absolute risk differences between exposure and control groups. Results Eighty-five studies were included after a screening of 1879 abstracts and 283 full text articles. Compared to SC, IVF/ICSI singleton pregnancies (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.60–1.80; I 2 = 80%) and multiple pregnancies (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.20–1.50; I 2 = 76%) were both associated with higher odds of HDP. Singleton pregnancies with oocyte donation had the highest odds of HDP out of all groups analyzed (OR 4.42; 95% CI 3.00–6.51; I 2 = 83%). Frozen embryo transfer resulted in higher odds of HDP (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.58–1.92; I 2 = 55%) than fresh embryo transfer (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.33–1.53; I 2 = 72%). The associations between IVF/ICSI pregnancies and SC were similar for preeclampsia. Most interventions had an NNH of 40 to 100, while singleton and multiple oocyte donation pregnancies had particularly low NNH for HDP (16 and 10, respectively). Conclusions Our meta-analysis confirmed that IVF/ICSI pregnancies are at higher odds of HDP and preeclampsia than SC, irrespective of the plurality. The odds were especially high in frozen embryo transfer and oocyte donation pregnancies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it