Obstetric quality of recovery: A weak surrogate measure of psychological distress and psychological wellness for cesarean delivery parturients—A prospective observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The obstetric quality of recovery score (ObsQoR-11) is a widely used self-report assessment in obstetric settings following cesarean deliveries (CD). However, this measure may not assess psychological variables as originally intended, which may inform quality care. The primary aim of this study was to explore the relationship between ObsQoR-11 and validated scales that measure peritraumatic distress and psychological wellness. 220 Canadian patients who underwent scheduled or unscheduled CD (mean age = 35.00 years, SD = 4.18) completed self-report surveys assessing: obstetric quality of recovery, peritraumatic distress, and psychological wellness. ObsQoR-11 exhibited significant but weak correlations with peritraumatic distress and psychological wellness. Peritraumatic distress and psychological wellness are independent constructs that should be measured separately in clinical practice outside of routine assessments using ObsQoR-11. As there was low convergent construct validity with these two measures, these psychological assessments may assist in providing additional assessments of holistic outcomes following cesarean delivery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".