MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206223460 · doi:10.1177/1753495x211041899

Myasthenia gravis in pregnancy: Systematic review and case series

2022· article· en· W4206223460 on OpenAlexaff
Harrison Banner, Kirsten M. Niles, Michelle Ryu, Mathew Sermer, Vera Bril, Kellie E. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetric Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyasthenia Gravis and Thymoma
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyasthenia gravisMedicinePregnancyExacerbationPediatricsIncidence (geometry)ObstetricsDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Myasthenia gravis is an autoimmune disease which can impact pregnancy. Methods: Six databases were systematically searched for studies with at least five subjects reporting pregnancy outcomes for women with myasthenia gravis in pregnancy. Assessment of bias was performed for all included studies. Forty-eight cases from our own centre were also included in the analysis. Results: In total, 32 publications met inclusion criteria for systematic review, for a total of 33 unique data sets including 48 cases from our institution. Outcome data was available for 824 pregnancies. Spontaneous vaginal delivery occurred in 56.3% of pregnancies. Overall risk of myasthenia gravis exacerbation was 33.8% with a 6.4% risk of myasthenic crisis in pregnancy and 8.2% postpartum. The incidence risk of transient neonatal myasthenia gravis was 13.0%. Conclusions: The current systematic review provides the best estimates of risk currently available to aid in counselling women with myasthenia gravis in pregnancy.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0120.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations38
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetric MedicineSame topicMyasthenia Gravis and ThymomaFrench-language works237,207