MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392032861 · doi:10.1097/ogx.0000000000001247

Effects of the ARRIVE (A Randomized Trial of Induction Versus Expectant Management) Trial on Elective Induction and Obstetric Outcomes in Term Nulliparous Patients

2024· article· en· W4392032861 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Nethery, Barbara Levy, K. McLean, Kristin Sitcov, Vivienne Souter

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health Outcomes
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineExpectant managementInduction of laborRandomized controlled trialObstetricsLabor inductionTerm (time)GynecologyPregnancySurgeryGestationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(Abstracted from Obstet Gynecol 2023;142:242–250) A few years ago, the ARRIVE trial (A Randomized Trail of Induction Versus Expectant Management) reported that elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparous patients decreased the risk of cesarean birth and of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy compared with expectant management. This presented a possible means to decrease the high rates of cesarean delivery among this patient group.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207