Maternal and Fetal Outcomes Among Pregnant Women With Endometriosis [ID 2683578]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Endometriosis, a prevalent disorder affecting around 10% of reproductive-aged women, has been linked to obstetric complications during pregnancy. This study aims to evaluate endometriosis prevalence in pregnancy and its effect on maternal and newborn outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, Nationwide Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) database from the United States between 1999 and 2019. Multivariate logistic regression analysis, controlling for diverse baseline maternal characteristics, was used to investigate pregnancy and newborn outcomes in births to women diagnosed with endometriosis as compared to those without. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 16,911,497 births to women without endometriosis and 14,956 pregnant women diagnosed with endometriosis. Over the 20-year period, there was a significant upward trend in prevalence of endometriosis among births, rising from 34.9 to 160.6/100,000 births. Births to women with endometriosis exhibited distinctive demographic characteristics: being of advanced maternal age, predominantly of Caucasian ethnicity, belonging to higher income quartiles, obese, smokers, and having private insurance coverage. Births to women with endometriosis were at heightened risk of experiencing obstetric complications, including gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, preterm birth, and postpartum hemorrhage. Neonates born to mothers with endometriosis also demonstrated an elevated likelihood of growth restriction and congenital anomalies. CONCLUSION: The study highlights the evolving prevalence of endometriosis among pregnant women and establishes a strong connection between endometriosis and adverse maternal and newborn outcomes. These findings emphasize the importance of vigilant monitoring to enhance obstetrical and fetal outcomes in pregnant women with endometriosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".