Global Disparities in Outcomes of Pregnant Individuals With Rheumatic Heart Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) remains as 1 of the major contributors to indirect pregnancy-related mortality and morbidity worldwide and disproportionately affects marginalized populations. Objectives: In this scoping review, the authors sought to explore the socioeconomic, cultural, and health care access-related causes of global disparities in outcomes of pregnancy among individuals with RHD. Methods: We performed a literature search of all studies published between January 1, 1990, and January 1, 2022, that investigated causes for disparate outcomes in pregnant individuals with RHD. Results: Of the 3,544 articles identified, 16 were included in the final analysis. The key reasons for disparate outcomes included lack of secondary antibiotic RHD prophylaxis; late and more severe RHD diagnosis, differences in management and antenatal care access; lack of expert and coordinated multidisciplinary care; suboptimal patient health education; inadequate access to RHD medication, intervention and surgery in pregnancy; and limited financial and economic resources. Conclusions: These findings illustrated using a life-course approach demonstrate opportunities for clinical and public health interventions to improve outcomes in this population.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".