MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387380501 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvad114.589

THU591 HyperAldosteronism In Pregnancy Predicted Impacts (H.A.P.P.I.): A Retrospective Cohort Study

2023· article· en· W4387380501 on OpenAlexaffabout
Diana Oprea, Frédérique Lefrançois, ANNE-MARIE C. CÔTÉ, Marie‐Ève Roy‐Lacroix, Matthieu St‐Jean, Nadine Sauvé

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal Regulation and Hypertension
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyRetrospective cohort studyPrimary aldosteronismObstetricsHyperaldosteronismCohortConcomitantCohort studyGynecologyPediatricsAldosteroneInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Disclosure: D. Oprea: None. F. Lefrançois: None. A.C. Côté: None. M. Roy-Lacroix: None. M. St-Jean: None. N. Sauvé: None. Introduction: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) are increasing worldwide and are associated with a high rate of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. Primary aldosteronism (PA) is a frequent and reversible cause of secondary hypertension in young non-pregnant women (18%) (1). Until now, no studies have detailed the prevalence, nor the outcomes associated with PA during pregnancy. Research Question: In HDP, are cases of PA associated with different impacts on maternal-fetal health compared to pregnant women without PA? Methods: This retrospective cohort study compared 252 pregnancies according to their PA status. We included pregnancies that were followed at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (CHUS) between 2011 and 2022, and who had had an aldosterone/renin ratio (ARR) screening for PA, in a five-year period before or after the analyzed pregnancy. Monofetal and twin pregnancies were included. Concomitant diagnoses of pheochromocytoma, hyperthyroidism or Cushing syndrome were excluded. The primary objective of this study was to describe the occurrence of HDP in women with PA. Secondary objectives were to describe maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes and compare them according to PA status. Results: Among 252 pregnancies, 15 were diagnosed with a PA (concerning 12 women). Our preliminary analysis showed a greater prevalence of advanced maternal age (53.3% vs 24.5, p = 0.028) and Afro-American ethnicity (60.0 % vs 10.1%, p < 0.001) in the PA group, in addition to a tendency towards class I obesity (40.0% vs 13.1%, p = 0.166) in this group. There were no differences in terms of prevalence of chronic hypertension (26.7% vs 25.7 %, p = 0.936), delivery mode and overall fetal morbidity and mortality. Although not statistically significant, preeclamspia tended to be more frequent (40.0% vs 27.0%, p = 0.276) and gestational hypertension less frequent (0.0 % vs 16.0%, p = 0.092) during pregnancy in the PA group. 40.1% (vs 19.0%, p = 0.052) of PA-associated HDP were diagnosed in post-partum (including 33.4 % of preeclampsia in this group) and required intravenous hypertensive treatment (40.0% vs 23.2%, p = 0.209). Also, 13.3% of pregnancies in the PA group (vs. 3.0 %, p = 0.093) required hospitalization at the intensive care unit (ICU). All cases of PA were diagnosed within 5 years pre-conception or post-partum. Conclusion: Pregnancies with PA diagnosis within a five-year period tended to present more frequently with HDP as preeclampsia, especially in the post-partum period, and often required more intensive antihypertensive treatment and ICU hospitalization. The upcoming second prospective phase of this study will better assess the prevalence of PA in pregnant women experiencing HDP. Reference: (1) Alam S. et al., Clin Endocrinol, June 2021;94(6):895903. Presentation: Thursday, June 15, 2023

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine SocietySame topicHormonal Regulation and HypertensionFrench-language works237,207