MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403216248 · doi:10.1002/ijgo.15946

Uterine rupture following prostaglandins use in second trimester medical abortion: Fact or fiction? A systematic review

2024· review· en· W4403216248 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Antonio Malvasi, Andrea Tinelli, Vanessa Mulone, Ettore Cicinelli, Amerigo Vitagliano, Gianluca Raffaello Damiani, Giorgio Maria Baldini, Miriam Dellino, Antonio D’Amato, Antonella Vimercati

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPreterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSystematic reviewAbortionCochrane LibraryMEDLINEGuidelinePregnancyObstetricsGynecologyFamily medicineMeta-analysisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prostaglandins (PGs) have emerged as key drugs in second trimester medical abortion (STMA) and are currently a cornerstone in obstetric practice. Nevertheless, the application of PGs, integral to labor and abortion procedures, is not risk-free, and has been associated with several complications, particularly maternal fever and uterine rupture (UR). OBJECTIVES: The main outcome of the present systematic review was to assess the safety of PGs use in STMA, particularly in scarred uterus (SC). SEARCH STRATEGY: The review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. We performed a comprehensive systematic review by searching multiple databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, The Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment Database, and the research registers of Web of Science during the years 1990-2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only articles regarding cases of UR occurred after the use of PGs for STMA were included in the article. We excluded papers regarding UR during first trimester abortion induction of labor or pregnancy or unrelated to PGs use for STMA. Risk of bias was assessed employing a modified version of the "Newcastle-Ottawa Scale" (NOS). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A total of 178 studies were initially identified as potentially meeting the criteria for inclusion in the review. After full text evaluation, 110 other articles were excluded and 67 studies that suited the inclusion criteria were included. A total of 19 of the included studies were judged to have a high risk of bias. Given the heterogeneous nature of the findings, we opted for a narrative synthesis of the results. MAIN RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: PGs appear to be an effective pharmacologic tool for STMA; however, their use is not entirely risk-free. STMA requires well-equipped obstetric centers with skilled clinicians and surgeons prepared for emergencies. Ultrasonographic scans should be routinely performed during STMA management, since a UR can also be silent during the induction of labor. Intrapartum transabdominal, transperineal, and transvaginal ultrasound may have the diagnostic potential to early recognize this obstetric emergency, to facilitate rapid medical and surgical treatment, improving the outcome.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.007
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsSame topicPreterm Birth and ChorioamnionitisFrench-language works237,207