Retrospective Cohort Study Comparing Current Third Stage Management to Expedient Squatting Third Stage Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Active management of the delivery of the placenta results in 5% postpartum hemorrhage, 1% blood transfusions and an average blood loss of 500 cc. Shorter third stages are associated with decreased hemorrhage rates. The third stage can be shortened by instructing the birthing woman to squat and push out the placenta at 3 minutes postpartum. The objective of this study was to compare blood loss and PPH rates using Judy's 3,4,5 minute third stage expedient squatting protocol to variations of active and expectant third stage management among similar populations.Methodology: A retrospective cohort study was carried out comparing 1,098 planned homebirths attended in Israel, in which Judy’s 3,4,5 expedient squatting third stage technique was practiced, to 2,899 planned homebirths attended by midwives in British Columbia, Canada, where currently accepted third stage management was used. The inclusion criteria for both groups were: Singleton fetus in cephalic presentation; gestational age 37+0 to 41+6 weeks; spontaneous onset of labor; history of up to one previous cesarean; absence of significant pre-existing disease and absence of significant disease arising during pregnancy. The main outcomes were postpartum hemorrhage and manual removal of the placenta. Results: Using identical inclusion criteria and similar management, variations of active and expectant management resulted in 4% PPH over 1000 cc and 1.0% manual removal. Expedient squatting resulted in 2/1098 cases of PPH>500 cc, zero cases of PPH over 1000 cc and 0.7% manual removal. Conclusion: Judy’s 3,4,5 minute third stage management minimizes postpartum bleeding compared to other third stage protocols, reproducing postpartum hemorrhage rates indigenous to primates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".