MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402733102 · doi:10.7326/m24-0417

Severe Maternal and Neonatal Morbidity Among Gestational Carriers

2024· article· en· W4402733102 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maria P. Vélez, Marina Ivanova, Jonas Shellenberger, Jessica Pudwell, Joel G. Ray

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and fetal healthcare
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsMaternal morbidityGestational ageIntensive care medicinePregnancyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Use of a gestational ("surrogate") carrier is increasingly common. Risk for maternal and neonatal adversity is largely unknown in this birthing population. OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk for severe maternal morbidity (SMM) and severe neonatal morbidity (SNM) in gestational carriers. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: All of Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: All singleton births at more than 20 weeks' gestation, from 2012 to 2021. MEASUREMENTS: Exposure was type of conception, namely, gestational carriage (main exposure), unassisted conception (comparison group 1), and in vitro fertilization (IVF) (comparison group 2). Main composite outcomes were SMM and SNM. Modified Poisson regression models generated weighted relative risks (wRRs) using propensity score-based overlap weighting. Secondary outcomes included hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, cesarean delivery, preterm birth, and postpartum hemorrhage. RESULTS: Of all eligible singleton births, 846 124 (97.6%) were by unassisted conception, 16 087 (1.8%) by IVF, and 806 (0.1%) by gestational carriage. Respective risks for SMM were 2.3%, 4.3%, and 7.8%. The wRRs were 3.30 (95% CI, 2.59 to 4.20) comparing gestational carriage with unassisted conception and 1.86 (CI, 1.36 to 2.55) comparing gestational carriage with IVF. Respective risks for SNM were 5.9%, 8.9%, and 6.6%, generating wRRs of 1.20 (CI, 0.92 to 1.55) for gestational carriage versus unassisted conception and 0.81 (CI, 0.61 to 1.08) for gestational carriage versus IVF. Hypertensive disorders, postpartum hemorrhage, and preterm birth at less than 37 weeks were also significantly higher contrasting gestational carriers to either comparison group. LIMITATION: Absence of information about indications for choosing a gestational carrier, and oocyte or sperm donor source. CONCLUSION: Among singleton births of more than 20 weeks' gestation, a higher risk for SMM and adverse pregnancy outcomes was seen among gestational carriers compared with women who conceived with and without assistance. Although gestational carriage was associated with preterm birth, there was less clear evidence of severe neonatal morbidity. Potential mechanisms for higher maternal morbidity among gestational carriers require elucidation, alongside developing special care plans for gestational carriers. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Internal MedicineSame topicMaternal and fetal healthcareFrench-language works237,207