Clinical and Obstetric Aspects of Pregnant Women with COVID-19: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective To analyze the clinical and obstetric aspects of pregnant women with COVID-19. Methods A systematic literature review in the MEDLINE/PubMed, LILACS, SCIELO, and CNKI databases was performed from March to May 2020, with the descriptors: Pregnancy; 2019-nCov; Coronavirus; SARS-Cov-2, Covid-19. Of those chosen were original titles, without language and period restriction and that addressed pregnant women with a clinical and/or laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19. Revisions, editorials, and duplicate titles were excluded. The Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS) and Murad et al. scales were used to assess the quality of the studies. Results We included 34 articles with 412 pregnant women infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-Cov-2), with an average age of 27.5 years of age and 36.0 gestational weeks. The most common symptom was fever (205 [49.7%]), and 89 (21.6%) pregnant women progressed to severe viral pneumonia. Laboratory tests showed an increase in C-reactive protein (154 [37.8%]), and radiological tests showed pneumonia with peripheral ground-glass pattern (172 [51.4%]). Emergency cesarean delivery was indicated for most pregnant women, and the most common gestational complication was premature rupture of ovarian membranes (14 [3.4%;]). We detected 2 (0.5%) neonatal deaths, 2 (0.5%) stillbirths, and 1 (0.2%) maternal death. Conclusion Pregnant women with COVID-19 presented a clinical picture similar to that of non-infected pregnant women, with few obstetric or neonatal repercussions. There was a greater indication of cesarean deliveries before the disease aggravated, and there was no evidence of vertical transmission of the infection.
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 | 0.081 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.066 | 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".