Maternal Near-Miss in a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Prospective Study From North India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Maternal near-miss is defined as a ‘woman who nearly died but survived a complication during pregnancy, childbirth or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy’. A sudden and unexpected event during pregnancy, childbirth, or even after delivery, is a risk that is faced by every pregnant woman. Aim:This study aimed to establish the incidence of maternal near-misses, and to evaluate the clinical and epidemiological profile and causes of maternal near-miss. Materials and Methods: This was an observational prospective study, conducted in Lalla Ded Hospital for a period of 18 months after obtaining ethical clearance. Women who fulfilled any of the WHO criteria for MNM were included in the study as maternal near-miss cases. Results: The hospital witnessed 36,273 live births over the period of the study, of which 821 involved a near-miss. This equates to a MNM incidence ratio of 22.63 per 1000 live births. The mortality index in our study was 3.97%, and the near-miss to mortality ratio was 24.14:1. Haemorrhage was the leading cause of MNM (N=429 or 2.25%), followed by hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (N=280 or 34.10%). Anaemia was the most common associated factor and was present in 460 (56.03%)patients. Conclusion: Early identification of risk factors for placenta accreta spectrum, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, medical disorders complicating pregnancy, anaemia, previous Caesarean section, and multifoetal pregnancy, among others, and thereby prompt management of such conditions, plays a critical role in the optimal management of MNM.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".