MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal Timing of Labor Induction After Prelabor Rupture of Membranes at Term: A Secondary Analysis of the TERMPROM Study

2023· article· en· W4389075187 on OpenAlexaff
Nir Melamed, Vincenzo Berghella, Cande V. Ananth, Hayley Lipworth, E.W. Yoon, Jon Barrett

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetric Anesthesia Digest · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy-related medical research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPromMedicineRupture of membranesLabor inductionInduction of laborTerm (time)PregnancyObstetricsPremature rupture of membranesFetusInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

( Am J Obstet Gynecol . 2023;228:326.e1–13) The rupture of membranes prior to labor (PROM) can be associated with dangerous complications. It is theorized that consistent monitoring and early induction can improve the outcome of women with PROM. The Term Prelabor Rupture of Membranes (TERMPROM) study is a study conducted to assess the effects and treatments of PROM. This study aimed to analyze and compare the TERMPROM study with the use of induction of labor (IOL) during pregnancy to reduce PROM effects.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.008
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetric Anesthesia DigestSame topicPregnancy-related medical researchFrench-language works237,207