VP42.08: Abstract withdrawn
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate whether fetal reduction of twin pregnancies to singleton is associated with a more favourable outcome for the remaining fetus.Methods: Retrospective analysis of all dichorionic-diamniotic twin pregnancies, who underwent fetal reduction.Pregnancy outcome was compared to ongoing, non-reduced, dichorionic-diamniotic gestations.Primary outcome was preterm birth prior to 37 gestational weeks.Secondary outcomes included: preterm birth prior to 34 gestational weeks, gestational age at delivery, birthweight, small for gestational age, hypertensive disorders, gestational diabetes and stillbirth.Results: 98 reduced pregnancies were compared with 222 ongoing twins.Preterm birth <37 gestational weeks (39.6% vs. 57.6%,p < 0.001) was significantly lower in the reduced group compared to the ongoing twins' group.Subgroup analysis demonstrated lower rates of preterm delivery in those undergoing elective reduction (OR = 0.245, 95% CI 0.086-0.697),reduction due to fetal anomalies (OR = 0.502, 95% CI 0.285-0.884)and 1st trimester reduction (OR = 0.297, 95% Cl 0.137-0.642)all compared to ongoing twins.A multivariate analysis, controlling for parity and mode of conception, demonstrated that fetal reduction independently and significantly reduced the risk for prematurity (aOR 0.495, 95% CI -0.299-0.819).A Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed a significant proportion of non-delivered women at each gestational week in the reduced group compared to non-reduced twins, after 29 gestational weeks.Conclusions: Fetal reduction from twins to singleton reduces the risk of preterm birth < 37 gestational weeks but not for more severe maternal and perinatal complications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.314 | 0.179 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".