The impact of COVID-19 on the management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: An assessment of quality of care and outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) affect up to 10% of women and require close monitoring to prevent adverse outcomes. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted in-person care, prompting adaptations in follow-up strategies. This study assesses the pandemic's impact on HDP management at a Quebec tertiary-level health center. Methods: A retrospective cohort study compared a pandemic group to a prepandemic matched control group of pregnant women with HDP (2015-2020). The primary outcome was the difference in the total number of antenatal follow ups. Results: Although nonsignificant, total follow ups increased by 11% during the pandemic (RR = 1.11; p = 0.122), driven by a fivefold rise in telephone visits (RR = 5.05; p < 0.001), while in-person visits remained stable. Adverse outcomes rates showed no significant changes. Conclusion: Increased telehealth use complemented stable in-person care, supporting continuity and flexibility in HDP management. Telehealth holds promise as a supportive tool in prenatal care 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".