MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413269856 · doi:10.1016/j.jogc.2025.103076

Placental Growth Factor Diagnostic Testing: An Opportunity to Transform Pregnancy Care for Patients With Suspected Preeclampsia in Canada

2025· article· en· W4413269856 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Kelsey McLaughlin, Melanie C. Audette, Harrison Banner, Jon Barrett, Emmanuel Bujold, Nicole J. Cohen, Tina Delaney, Ernesto Figueiro, Rachel A. Gladstone, Venu Jain, Jessica Liauw, Isabelle Malhamé, Elad Mei‐Dan, Nir Melamed, Kellie E. Murphy, Chris Nash, Christy Pylypjuk, Naila Ramji, Anjana Chandran, Karen C. Tran, Ana Werlang, Rebecca L. Zur, John‏ Kingdom, John W. Snelgrove

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalVancouver General HospitalSaint John Regional HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreNorth York General HospitalMcGill University Health CentreB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreRoyal Alexandra HospitalMemorial University of NewfoundlandTrillium Health CentreUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversité LavalMcMaster UniversityWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoDr. Everett Chalmers Regional HospitalDalhousie UniversityHamilton Health SciencesLakeridge HealthSinai Health System
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicinePlacental growth factorPreeclampsiaPregnancyBiomarkerDiagnostic testObstetricsTest (biology)Intensive care medicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preeclampsia is a leading cause of maternal morbidity and adverse perinatal outcomes in Canada. Growing evidence supports the novel blood-based biomarker placental growth factor (PlGF) as a diagnostic test to accelerate the timely diagnosis of preeclampsia, enhancing care for hypertensive pregnant patients. Despite national endorsement, challenges like regional disparities and test standardization hinder PlGF implementation. The Canadian PlGF Strategy & Research Consortium convened with representation from clinicians, researchers, and patient partners to discuss the current state of PlGF testing. We universally agreed there is an urgent need to implement diagnostic PlGF testing to improve maternal and perinatal outcomes in Canada.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada→Same topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies→French-language works237,207→