Maternal and neonatal outcomes among pregnant women with inflammatory myopathies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Pregnancy outcomes in women with inflammatory myopathies (IM) are not well studied. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of IM on maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project - Nationwide Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) from 1999 to 2015. Among all pregnant women who delivered during this period, those with a diagnosis of IM were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) coding, which included all patients with dermatomyositis and polymyositis. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared in pregnant women with and without IM. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the adjusted effects of IM on these outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 13,792,544 pregnant women delivered between 1999 and 2015, of which 308 had a diagnosis of IM, for an overall prevalence of 2 per 100,000 pregnant women, with rates increasing over the study period. Pregnant women with IM were more likely to be older, African American and suffer from other autoimmune connective tissue diseases. IM in pregnancy was associated with greater risk of preeclampsia, caesarean delivery, major postpartum infections, urinary tract infections and longer hospital stay. Neonates born to mothers with IM had greater risk of prematurity, small for gestational age and intrauterine fetal demise. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women with IM are at higher risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes and should be closely followed in specialized centers with collaboration between maternal-fetal medicine and rheumatology.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".