MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384008224 · doi:10.3389/fphar.2023.1153013

Comparing the efficacy of vaginal micronized progesterone gel and capsule for prevention of preterm birth in singleton pregnancies with short cervical length at midtrimester: an indirect comparison meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4384008224 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Doron Kabiri, Yael Hamou, Gali Gordon, Yossef Ezra, Ilan Matok

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pharmacology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPreterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialObservational studyRelative riskGestationPregnancyCochrane LibraryCervixMiscarriageGynecologyConfidence intervalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of vaginal progesterone in preventing preterm birth in women with a singleton gestation and short cervical length and to determine which of the two formulations, micronized progesterone vaginal capsule versus vaginal gel containing micronized progesterone, is more effective for preventing preterm birth. Data sources: A systematic search was performed in the following databases: EMBASE, PubMed (MEDLINE), The Cochrane Library, and the Clinical Trials Registry ( clinicaltrials.gov ). Study eligibility criteria: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective observational studies were included. We searched for progesterone administration to prevent preterm birth in asymptomatic women with a shortened cervix (<25 mm) measured by ultrasound in the second trimester of singleton pregnancy. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Assessments of the risk of bias of RCTs were performed by applying the Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias Tool; non-randomized control trials were evaluated with the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS). The primary outcome was preterm birth ≤33 weeks of gestation. Pooled relative risks (RR) and 95% CI’s were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. Heterogeneity of treatment effect was assessed with the I 2 statistic. We pooled results of the primary outcome for individual studies using a random-effect model. We then performed a network meta-analysis to pool indirect comparisons between the two formulations (gel vs capsule). This analysis was performed using the network meta-analysis package within the R environment. Results: Five studies met the inclusion criteria (4 RCTs, one cohort study) including 1,048 women. The meta-analysis demonstrated that vaginal micronized progesterone significantly reduces preterm birth risk, Risk Ratio = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48–0.82; p = 0.0006; with no heterogeneity between the studies: I 2 = 0%. In the network meta-analysis, no significant difference was demonstrated (OR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.43–1.69) between the effect of the two formulations of vaginal micronized progesterone (vaginal gel versus vaginal capsules) on the risk of PTB. Conclusion: Vaginal progesterone is associated with a decreased risk of premature birth in women with a shortened cervix in the second trimester of pregnancy. No differences were found between vaginal micronized progesterone in gel or capsule formulations. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42020165198.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PharmacologySame topicPreterm Birth and ChorioamnionitisFrench-language works237,207