In-hospital complications in pregnancies conceived by assisted reproductive technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background \nAssisted reproductive technology (ART) has emerged as a common treatment option for infertility, a problem that affects an estimated 48 million couples worldwide. Advancing maternal age with increasing pre-pregnancy cardiovascular risk factors, such as chronic hypertension, obesity and diabetes, has raised concerns about pregnancy complications associated with ART. However, in-hospital complications following pregnancies conceived by ART are poorly described. \n \nMethods and Results \nTo assess the patient characteristics, obstetric outcomes, vascular complications and temporal trends of pregnancies conceived by ART, we analysed hospital deliveries conceived with or without ART between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2016 from the United States National Inpatient Sample database. We included 106,248 deliveries conceived with ART and 34,167,246 deliveries conceived without ART. Women who conceived with ART were older (35 vs. 28 years, p<0.0001) and had more comorbidities. ART-conceived pregnancies were independently associated with vascular complications (acute kidney injury aOR 2.52, 95% CI 1.99, 3.19, arrhythmia aOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.46, 1.86), and adverse obstetric outcomes (placental abruption aOR 1.57, 95% CI 1.41, 1.74, Cesarean delivery aOR 1.38, 95% CI 1.33, 1.43 and preterm birth aOR 1.26, 95% CI 1.20, 1.32), including in subgroups without CVD risk factors or without multifetal pregnancies. Higher hospital charges ($18,705 vs. $11,983, p<0.0001) were incurred compared to women who conceived without ART. \n \nConclusions \nPregnancies conceived by ART have higher risks of adverse obstetric outcomes and vascular complications compared with spontaneous conception. Clinicians should have detailed discussions on the associated complications of ART in women during pre-pregnancy counselling.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".