MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prospective Validation of First-Trimester Screening for Preterm Preeclampsia in Nulliparous Women (PREDICTION Study)

2024· article· en· W4396672838 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Guerby, François Audibert, Jo‐Ann Johnson, Nanette Okun, Yves Giguère, Jean‐Claude Forest, Nils Chaillet, Benoı̂t Mâsse, D. Wright, Louise Ghesquière, Emmanuel Bujold

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversité de MontréalUniversity of CalgaryCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreeclampsiaMedicineObstetricsProspective cohort studyUterine arteryPregnancyBlood pressureGynecologyGestationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) studies suggest that preterm preeclampsia can be predicted in the first trimester by combining biophysical, biochemical, and ultrasound markers and prevented using aspirin. We aimed to evaluate the FMF preterm preeclampsia screening test in nulliparous women. METHODS: We conducted a prospective multicenter cohort study of nulliparous women recruited at 11 to 14 weeks. Maternal characteristics, mean arterial blood pressure, PAPP-A (pregnancy-associated plasma protein A), PlGF (placental growth factor) in maternal blood, and uterine artery pulsatility index were collected at recruitment. The risk of preterm preeclampsia was calculated by a third party blinded to pregnancy outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to estimate the detection rate (sensitivity) and the false-positive rate (1-specificity) for preterm (<37 weeks) and for early-onset (<34 weeks) preeclampsia according to the FMF screening test and according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists criteria. RESULTS: We recruited 7554 participants including 7325 (97%) who remained eligible after 20 weeks of which 65 (0.9%) developed preterm preeclampsia, and 22 (0.3%) developed early-onset preeclampsia. Using the FMF algorithm (cutoff of ≥1 in 110 for preterm preeclampsia), the detection rate was 63.1% for preterm preeclampsia and 77.3% for early-onset preeclampsia at a false-positive rate of 15.8%. Using the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists criteria, the equivalent detection rates would have been 61.5% and 59.1%, respectively, for a false-positive rate of 34.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The first-trimester FMF preeclampsia screening test predicts two-thirds of preterm preeclampsia and three-quarters of early-onset preeclampsia in nulliparous women, with a false-positive rate of ≈16%. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02189148.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations23
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207