MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413445993 · doi:10.1016/j.puhip.2025.100650

Feasibility of establishing a Canadian Obstetric Survey System (CanOSS) for severe maternal morbidity: results of a nationwide survey

2025· article· en· W4413445993 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Isabelle Malhamé, Rebecca Seymour, Rizwana Ashraf, Paige Gehrke, Joseph Beyene, Tegwende Seedu, Rashid Ahmed, Susie Dzakpasu, Sara Thorne, Deshayne B. Fell, Amy Metcalfe, Kenneth K. Chen, Stephen E. Lapinsky, Leslie Skeith, Beth Murray‐Davis, Josie Chundamala, Sarah A. Hutchinson, Thomas van den Akker, Maria B. Ospina, Prakesh S. Shah, K.S. Joseph, Heather Scott, Jon Barrett, Jocelynn L. Cook, Marian Knight, Rohan D’Souza

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health in Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and fetal healthcare
Canadian institutionsThe Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of CanadaIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie UniversityBC Children's HospitalChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaUniversity of British ColumbiaCARE CanadaUniversity of TorontoMcGill University Health CentrePublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of OttawaMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of CalgaryImpactQueen's UniversityMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMaternal morbidityMedicineSurvey researchFamily medicinePregnancyPsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Obtaining data on events, processes, and circumstances leading to severe maternal morbidity (SMM) could enable targeted interventions to improve care. We aimed to assess the feasibility of gathering such data from across Canada through an Obstetric Survey System (CanOSS). Study design: A nationwide survey. Methods: We administered the electronic survey in French or English to birthing unit leads across all Canadian provinces and territories using REDCap. We presented pooled participation rates (95 % confidence intervals [CI]) across birthing units from lowest, medium, and highest tiers of service using Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformations and common-effect models. Results: Of the 289 birthing units across Canada, 167 (57.8 %) participated in the survey. Pooled participation rates per province and territory stratified by highest, medium, and lowest tiers of service were 91.5 % (95 % CI [73.4, 100]), 58.6 % (95 % CI [48.5, 68.6]), and 54.4 % (95 % CI [41.7, 66.3]), respectively. Units reported postpartum hemorrhage (82.5 %), hypertensive disorders (65.7 %), infections (35.0 %), venous thromboembolism (16.0 %), and maternal birth injuries (15.4 %) as the leading causes of SMM. Most birthing units (80.3 %) had a system in place for reviewing SMM events. Although most review systems involved multidisciplinary expert panels with representation from birthing unit leads (82.0 %), nursing (78.0 %), and obstetrics (73.7 %), specialties, such as obstetric anaesthesia (42.4 %), midwifery (41.5 %), and internal medicine (16.9 %), were underrepresented. Lessons learned were rarely shared outside the hospital and never shared beyond regional health authorities. Importantly, 76.2 % of respondents were willing to contribute anonymized SMM data within a centralized reporting system. Conclusions: Most responding Canadian birthing units have a process in place to review SMM and would be willing to share anonymized data as part of a centralized initiative, thereby demonstrating the feasibility of leveraging existing infrastructures to establish CanOSS.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Health in PracticeSame topicMaternal and fetal healthcareFrench-language works237,207