MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393339251 · doi:10.52054/fvvo.16.1.004

Impact of congenital uterine anomalies on obstetric and perinatal outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· article· en· W4393339251 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M Caballero Campo, Federico Pérez Milán, María Carrera Roig, E Moratalla Bartolomé, Jaume Arroyo, Juan Luis Alcázar Zambrano, Luís Alonso Pacheco, José Carugno

Bibliographic record

VenueFacts Views and Vision in ObGyn · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGynecological conditions and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlacental abruptionMedicineObstetricsMiscarriagePremature rupture of membranesPregnancyPromMeta-analysisIntrauterine growth restrictionGestational ageOdds ratioGynecologyGestationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Congenital uterine anomalies (CUA) can be associated with impairments of early and late pregnancy events. Objective: To assess the impact of CUA on reproductive outcomes in pregnancies conceived spontaneously or after assisted reproduction. Materials and Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies comparing patients with CUA versus women with normal uterus. A structured literature search was performed in leading scientific databases to identify prospective and retrospective studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale, adapted to AHRQ standards, was used to assess the risk of bias. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated. Publication bias and statistical heterogeneity were assessed, and meta-regression was used to analyse the heterogeneity. Main outcome measures: Miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, placental abruption, term, and premature rupture of membranes (PROM), malpresentation at delivery, preterm delivery prior to 37, 34 and 32 weeks, caesarean delivery, intrauterine growth restriction/small for gestational age, foetal mortality and perinatal mortality. Results: 32 studies were included. CUAs increased significantly the risk of first/second trimester miscarriage (OR:1.54;95%CI:1.14-2.07), placental abruption (OR:5.04;3.60-7.04), PROM (OR:1.71;1.34-2.18), foetal malpresentation at delivery (OR:21.04;10.95-40.44), preterm birth (adjusted OR:4.34;3.59-5.21), a caesarean delivery (adjusted OR:7.69;4.17-14.29), intrauterine growth restriction/small for gestational age (adjusted OR:50;6.11-424), foetal mortality (OR:2.07;1.56-2.73) and perinatal mortality (OR:3.28;2.01-5.36). Conclusions: CUA increases the risk of complications during pregnancy, delivery, and postpartum. Complications most frequent in CUA patients were preterm delivery, foetal malpresentation, and caesarean delivery. What is new?: Bicornuate uterus was associated with the highest number of adverse outcomes, followed by didelphys, subseptate and septate uterus.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.559
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.350 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFacts Views and Vision in ObGynSame topicGynecological conditions and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207