Despite Increased Disease Activity, Women who Attended a Dedicated Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Pregnancy Clinic Had Infants With Higher Apgar Scores: A Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Attendance at a subspecialty pregnancy clinic for women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) improves disease-specific pregnancy knowledge. We examined the impact of attendance at a dedicated IBD-pregnancy clinic on IBD and perinatal outcomes. METHODS: Using linked administrative databases in Alberta, Canada (2012-2019), we identified 1061 pregnant women with IBD who delivered singleton liveborn infants in-hospital who did (n = 314) and did not attend (n = 747) the clinic. Propensity score weighted multivariable log-binomial and multinomial logistic regression models were used to determine the risk of IBD and perinatal outcomes. RESULTS: The median number of clinic visits was 3 (Q1-Q3, 3-5), with 34.7% completing a preconception consultation. A greater proportion of women who attended lived near the clinic, were nulliparous, had a disease flare prior to pregnancy, and were on maintenance IBD medication (P < .05). Women who attended had increased risks of a disease flare during pregnancy (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 2.02; 95% CI, 1.45-2.82), an IBD-related emergency department visit during pregnancy (aRR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.92-3.68), and cesarean delivery (aRR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.23-2.57). Despite this, clinic attendees had a decreased risk of delivering an infant with a low Apgar score at 1 minute (risk ratio [RR], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32-0.76) and 5 minutes (RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.12-0.87). CONCLUSIONS: Women who attended a dedicated IBD-pregnancy clinic were more likely to have a disease flare prior to pregnancy, reflecting a more severe disease phenotype, but had similar perinatal outcomes and infants with better Apgar scores at birth. Our study suggests the value of these subspecialty clinics in providing enhanced IBD-specific prenatal care.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".