MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406653836 · doi:10.2196/64826

Informatics Interventions for Maternal Morbidity: Scoping Review

2025· review· en· W4406653836 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jill Inderstrodt, Julia Stumpff, Rebecca C. Smollen, Sarah A. El‐Azab, Opeyemi Ojo, Brendan Bowns, David A. Haggstrom

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintPsychological interventionInformaticsHealth informaticsComputer scienceMedicineEngineeringWorld Wide WebNursingElectrical engineeringPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Women have been entering pregnancy less healthy than previous generations, placing them at increased risk for pregnancy complications. One approach to ensuring effective monitoring and treatment of at-risk women is designing technology-based interventions that prevent maternal morbidities and treat perinatal conditions. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review evaluates what informatics interventions have been designed and tested to prevent and treat maternal morbidity. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies. The inclusion criteria were studies that tested a medical or clinical informatics intervention; enrolled adult women; and addressed preeclampsia, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), preterm birth, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-defined severe maternal morbidity, or perinatal mental health conditions. Demographic, population, and intervention data were extracted to characterize the technologies, conditions, and populations addressed. RESULTS: A total of 80 studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Many of the studies tested for multiple conditions. Of these, 73% (60/82) of the technologies were tested for either GDM or perinatal mental health conditions, and 15% (12/82) were tested for preeclampsia. For technologies, 32% (28/87) of the technologies tested were smartphone or tablet applications, 26% (23/87) were telehealth interventions, and 14% (12/87) were remote monitoring technologies. Of the many outcomes measured by the studies, almost half (69/140, 49%) were patient physical or mental health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Per this scoping review, most informatics interventions address three conditions: GDM, preeclampsia, and mental health. There may be opportunities to treat other potentially lethal conditions like postpartum hemorrhage using proven technologies such as mobile apps. Ample gaps in the literature exist concerning the use of informatics technologies aimed at maternal morbidity. There may be opportunities to use informatics for lesser-targeted conditions and populations.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0120.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.486
GPT teacher head0.727
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207