Severe neonatal birth injury: Observational study of associations with operative, cesarean, and spontaneous vaginal delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine the association of successful and unsuccessful operative vaginal delivery attempts with risk of severe neonatal birth injury. METHODS: We conducted a population-based observational study of 1 080 503 births between 2006 and 2019 in Quebec, Canada. The main exposure was operative vaginal delivery with forceps or vacuum, elective or emergency cesarean with or without an operative vaginal attempt, and spontaneous delivery. The outcome was severe birth injury, including intracranial hemorrhage, brain and spinal damage, Erb's paralysis and other brachial plexus injuries, epicranial subaponeurotic hemorrhage, skull and long bone fractures, and liver, spleen, and other neonatal body injuries. We determined the association of delivery mode with risk of severe birth injury using adjusted risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: A total of 8194 infants (0.8%) had severe birth injuries. Compared with spontaneous delivery, vacuum (RR 2.98, 95% CI 2.80-3.16) and forceps (RR 3.35, 95% CI 3.07-3.66) were both associated with risk of severe injury. Forceps was associated with intracranial hemorrhage (RR 16.4, 95% CI 10.1-26.6) and brain and spinal damage (RR 13.5, 95% CI 5.72-32.0), while vacuum was associated with epicranial subaponeurotic hemorrhage (RR 27.5, 95% CI 20.8-36.4) and skull fractures (RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.86-2.25). Emergency cesarean after an unsuccessful operative attempt was associated with intracranial and epicranial subaponeurotic hemorrhage, but elective and other emergency cesareans were not associated with severe injury. CONCLUSIONS: Operative vaginal delivery and unsuccessful operative attempts that result in an emergency cesarean are associated with elevated risks of severe birth injury.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".