MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362578753 · doi:10.1016/j.preghy.2023.03.002

WILL (When to induce labour to limit risk in pregnancy hypertension): Protocol for a multicentre randomised trial

2023· article· en· W4362578753 on OpenAlexaff
Katie Kirkham, Sue Tohill, Jennifer A. Hutcheon, Jon Dorling, Eleni Gkini, Catherine A Moakes, Clive Stubbs, Jim Thornton, Peter von Dadelszen, Laura A. Magee

Bibliographic record

VenuePregnancy Hypertension · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsPregnancyGestational ageContraindicationRandomized controlled trialPediatricsGestational hypertensionInformed consentGestationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To address optimal timing of birth for women with chronic or gestational hypertension who reach term and remain well. Pragmatic, non-masked randomised trial. Inclusion: maternal age ≥16 years, chronic or gestational hypertension, singleton pregnancy, live fetus, 36+0–37+6 weeks’ gestation, and able to give documented informed consent. Exclusion: contraindication to either trial arm (e.g., pre-eclampsia or another indication for birth at term), blood pressure (BP) ≥ 160/110 mmHg until controlled, major fetal anomaly anticipated to require neonatal care unit admission, or participation in another timing of birth trial. Randomisation (1:1 ratio, minimised for key prognostic variables: site, hypertension type, and prior Caesarean) to ‘planned early term birth at 38+0-3 weeks’ or ‘usual care at term’ (revised from ‘expectant care until at least 40+0 weeks’, Aug 2022). Maternal co-primary: composite of ‘poor maternal outcome’ (severe hypertension, maternal death, or maternal morbidity). Neonatal co-primary: neonatal care unit admission for ≥4 h. Each co-primary is measured until primary hospital discharge or 28 days post-birth (whichever is earlier). Key secondary: Caesarean birth. Sample of 1080 participants (540/arm) will detect an 8% reduction in the maternal co-primary (90% power, superiority hypothesis), and give 94% power for a between-group non-inferiority margin of difference of 9% in the neonatal co-primary. Analysis will be by intention-to-treat. Ethics approval has been obtained (NHS Health Research Authority London Fulham Research Ethics Committee, 18/LO/2033). The study will provide data for women to make informed choices about their care and allow health systems to plan services.

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)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.007
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1430.028

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePregnancy HypertensionSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207