Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pregnancy and labor in patients with Prune Belly syndrome (PBS) have only been described in three cases in the literature. In these case reports, two patients had elective cesarean section due to PBS and consequences of the syndrome. One patient attempted vaginal delivery, had a prolonged second stage of labor and delivered by vacuum-assisted delivery. We aimed to investigate the feasibility of vaginal delivery in women with hypoplastic abdominal muscles without the need for instrumental or operative intervention. We report a patient with PBS, only affecting the abdominal muscles, who attempted vaginal delivery. Due to prolonged second stage of labor and exhaustion and after being fully dilated for 3 h with no evident progression, an emergency cesarean section was performed. The second stage of labor involves coordinated uterine contractions and voluntary maternal efforts. Impairment of the second stage of labor can occur if the woman is unable to effectively push, due to factors such as hypoplastic abdominal muscles. This inability to generate sufficient intra-abdominal pressure can lead to prolonged labor, increased risk of fetal distress, and the potential need for instrumental delivery or cesarean section to ensure the safety of both the mother and the fetus. Our case supports the thesis that patients with PBS may experience prolonged second stage of labor and need assisted instrumental or operative delivery. Whether it is possible for a patient with PBS to deliver vaginally without instrumental or operative interference is yet unknown. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2024;13(2):51-53 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jcgo967
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".