MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4328111245 · doi:10.2147/ijwh.s397680

Do Case Reports and Case Series Generate Clinical Discoveries About Preeclampsia? A Systematic Review

2023· review· en· W4328111245 on OpenAlexaff
Ghayath Janoudi, Mara Uzun, Stephanie T Boyd, Deshayne B. Fell, Joel G. Ray, Angel M. Foster, Randy Giffen, Tammy Clifford, Mark Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Women s Health · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsGovernment of CanadaUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalIBM (Canada)Children's Hospital of Eastern OntarioOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePreeclampsiaChecklistMEDLINEPresentation (obstetrics)Critical appraisalPregnancyEtiologyObstetricsPediatricsAlternative medicineInternal medicinePsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Preeclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. The management of preeclampsia has not changed much in more than two decades, and its aetiology is still not fully understood. Case reports and case series have traditionally been used to communicate new knowledge about existing conditions. Whether this is true for preeclampsia is not known. Objective: To determine whether recent case reports or case series have generated new knowledge and clinical discoveries about preeclampsia. Methods: A detailed search strategy was developed in consultation with a medical librarian. Two bibliographic databases were searched through Ovid: Embase and MEDLINE. We selected case reports or case series published between 2015 and 2020, comprising pregnant persons diagnosed with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, including preeclampsia. Two reviewers independently screened all publications. One reviewer extracted data from included studies, while another conducted a quality check of extracted data. We developed a codebook to guide our data extraction and outcomes assessment. The quality of each report was determined based on Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for case reports and case series. Results: We included 104 case reports and three case series, together comprising 118 pregnancies. A severe presentation or complication of preeclampsia was reported in 81% of pregnancies, and 84% had a positive maternal outcome, free of death or persistent complications. Only 8% of the case reports were deemed to be of high quality, and 53.8% of moderate quality; none of the case series were of high quality. A total of 26 of the 107 publications (24.3%) included a novel clinical discovery as a central theme. Conclusion: Over two-thirds of recent case reports and case series about preeclampsia do not appear to present new knowledge or discoveries about preeclampsia, and most are of low quality.

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.258
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.258
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.005
Bibliometrics0.0280.022
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.348 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Women s HealthSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207