MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236252618 · doi:10.1111/jpc.13882_209

Partners in Inner‐City Integrated Prenatal Care (PIIPC) Project in Winnipeg, Canada: Effect on Rates of Inadequate Prenatal Care at a Population Level

2018· article· en· W4236252618 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Paediatrics and Child Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePrenatal carePopulationFamily medicineGerontologyEnvironmental healthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

while accounting for the potential impacts of underlying maternal psychiatric illness.Methods: Retrospective cohort study of 3,024 women delivering liveborn preterm infants (<37 weeks gestation) between January 2004 and December 2008 at a tertiary teaching hospital in Adelaide, Australia.The primary outcome was postnatal domperidone use, considered a valid proxy for presence and pharmacological management of low milk supply.Relative risks adjusted for maternal sociodemographics and comorbidities (aRRs) were calculated for low milk supply, comparing women with late pregnancy exposure to SRI antidepressants (n = 86), women with a psychiatric illness but no antidepressant use (n=126), and women with neither antenatal exposures (n=2812).Results: Compared to non-exposed women, non-medicated psychiatric illness (aRR 1.67; 95%CI 1.18-2.35)but not late pregnancy SRI use (aRR 0.96; 95%CI 0.54-1.71)was associated with an increased risk of domperidone use, indicative of low milk supply.Conclusions: These findings do not support the previously observed negative impacts of antidepressant use on breastfeeding, instead suggesting that women with an underlying psychiatric illness appear at greatest risk of experiencing low milk supply and could benefit from additional breastfeeding education and support.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Paediatrics and Child HealthSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207