MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3199879182 · doi:10.33574/hjog.1870

Post Partum Hemorrhage – Mini Review

2019· article· en· W3199879182 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charalampos Voros, Kalliopi I. Pappa

Bibliographic record

VenueHellenic Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and fetal healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUterotonicUterine atonyMedicinePsychological interventionPost partumMedical journalIntervention (counseling)Intensive care medicineObstetricsGynecologyOxytocinPregnancyFamily medicineHysterectomySurgeryNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) remains a common cause of maternal mortality worldwide, mainly caused by uterine atony. Medical intervention plays an important part in prevention and therapies of PPH. Prophylactic interventions include the use of uterotonic drugs. We elaborated the consistency of national and international guidelines on those medical approaches. Materials and methods: Medical approaches in PPH were extracted from recent publications. Furthermore, the current guidelines of the World Health Organization, the FIGO and of the American, British,and Canadian of Obstetricians and Gynecologists on PPH were analyzed. Results: Use of oxytocin after delivery of the anterior shoulder is the most important and effective component of this practice. However, the examined guidelines fail to give unequivocal recommendations on further uterotonics in PPH, which may partially be attributed to differing publication dates of the guidelines. Conclusion: Appropriate management of postpartum hemorrhage requires prompt diagnosis and treatment . International guidelines on PPH are characterized by differing recommendations. However, recent publications suggest that adhering to local guidelines significantly reduces the prevalence of severe PPH.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHellenic Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology→Same topicMaternal and fetal healthcare→French-language works237,207→