MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406676154 · doi:10.18632/oncoscience.613

Maternal, delivery and neonatal outcomes in women with cervical cancer. A study of a population database

2025· article· en· W4406676154 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron M. Samuels, Ahmad Badeghiesh, Haitham Baghlaf, Michael H. Dahan

Bibliographic record

VenueOncoscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsRoyal Victoria HospitalRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsCervical cancerPopulationDatabaseGynecologyCancerInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer among women globally and a significant cause of cancer-related deaths. Understanding the impact of cervical cancer diagnosed during pregnancy on maternal, delivery, and neonatal outcomes is crucial for improving clinical management and outcomes for affected women and their children. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of cervical cancer diagnosed during pregnancy on maternal, delivery, and neonatal outcomes using a population based, American database. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective analysis of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) database. The study period spans between 2004-2014, and the analysis was conducted in 2023. SETTING: The study used the HCUP-NIS database, which includes data from hospital stays across the United States, covering 48 states and the District of Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: The study included all women who delivered a child or had a maternal death from 2004-2014, with pregnancies at 24 weeks or above. The population was comprised of 9,096,788 pregnant women, including 222 diagnosed with cervical cancer prior to delivery. EXPOSURES: The exposure was a diagnosis of cervical cancer during pregnancy, identified using International Classification of Diseases 9th Revision codes 180.0, 180.1, 180.8, and 180.9. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcomes included maternal, delivery, and neonatal complications including preterm delivery, cesarean section, hysterectomy, blood transfusion, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, congenital anomalies, intrauterine fetal demise, and small-for-gestational-age neonates. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the association between cervical cancer diagnosis and these outcomes, adjusting for potential confounding factors. RESULTS: = 0.003). Neonatal outcomes, including congenital anomalies, intrauterine fetal demise, and small-for-gestational-age neonates, were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Cervical cancer during pregnancy is associated with significant maternal and delivery risks, however, neonatal outcomes are largely unaffected. These findings highlight the need for a multidisciplinary approach in managing pregnant cervical cancer patients, involving oncological, obstetrical, and neonatal care specialists.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncoscienceSame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207