MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400019332 · doi:10.2196/preprints.63463

Stimulation Therapy to Induce Mothers (STIM): Protocol for a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)

2024· preprint· en· W4400019332 on OpenAlexaff
Danna Tortal, Veronika Shabanova, Sarah Taylor, Xiao Xu, Molly McAdow, Bethany Stetson, Sarah McCollum, Ester Sánchez, Amie Adjakple, JESSICA LEVENTHAL, Moeun Son

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)StimulationMedicinePsychologyNeuroscienceComputer scienceInternal medicineAlternative medicineWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Over 1 million women have their labor induced in the United States each year, and synthetic oxytocin infusion is the most common method used. However, compared to spontaneous labor, medical induction is resource-intensive, has increased obstetric risks, and is associated with less successful breastfeeding. In contrast to endogenous oxytocin hormone which is released in a pulsatile fashion in the brain, synthetic oxytocin is continuously infused intravenously, resulting in important limitations related to efficacy, safety, and cost. Akin to spontaneous labor contractions, infant suckling of the breast nipple is known to stimulate the pulsatile release of endogenous oxytocin from the posterior pituitary gland. Nipple stimulation therapy via electric breast pump similarly stimulates endogenous oxytocin release and may be a favorable inpatient method for patients undergoing labor induction. OBJECTIVE To examine whether inpatient nipple stimulation therapy is an efficacious labor induction method that increases the likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery and sustained breastfeeding and determine whether it is a cost-effective approach. METHODS This is a multicenter, pragmatic, open-label, parallel group randomized trial of nulliparous patients with singleton gestations 36 weeks undergoing labor induction. This trial compares inpatient nipple stimulation therapy via electric breast pump versus immediate synthetic oxytocin infusion without nipple stimulation. This trial of 988 nulliparas will provide adequate statistical power to detect clinically meaningful differences in delivery mode and breastmilk as the sole source of nutrition for newborns at hospital discharge or 72 hours of birth. RESULTS The project received pilot funding in 2021 and full funding in 2023. Enrollment began in November 2021 at a single site and is now being conducted at three recruiting sites. It is anticipated that enrollment will be completed in late 2026. CONCLUSIONS Successful completion of this trial will provide rigorous data to determine whether inpatient nipple stimulation therapy with an electric breast pump can improve the way we induce labor and positively impact breastfeeding success and early infant nutrition through lactation. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05079841

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1020.013

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 head0.372
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfant Development and Preterm Care→French-language works237,207→