MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415946525 · doi:10.1097/ogx.0000000000001438

Intrahepatic Cholestasis of Pregnancy: A Comparative Review of Guidelines

2025· review· en· W4415946525 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sonia Giouleka, Christiana Zafeirati, Antonios Siargkas, Georgios Michos, Sofoklis Stavros, Anastasios Potiris, Apostolos Mamopoulos, Ioannis Kalogiannidis, Themistoklis Dagklis, Ιoannis Tsakiridis

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCholestasisDifferential diagnosisFetusMEDLINEDifferential (mechanical device)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) is a pregnancy-specific liver disorder associated with significant maternal complications and increased neonatal morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review and compare the most recently published influential guidelines on the diagnosis and management of ICP, highlighting the discrepancies in key areas. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A descriptive review of 6 national guidelines from the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, the Society of Obstetric Medicine of Australia and New Zealand, the Chinese Medical Association, and the Working Group on Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine of Germany was conducted along with a comparison of their recommendations regarding this pregnancy complication. RESULTS: There is an overall agreement among the reviewed guidelines regarding the definition and the diagnosis of ICP, although minor discrepancies exist with regard to the bile acid cutoff levels. They also highlight the importance of a detailed history and physical examination to exclude other potential causes of maternal pruritus and recommend the evaluation of liver function and the appropriate counseling on the associated maternal and neonatal complications following diagnosis. Ursodeoxycholic acid is recommended by all guidelines (except from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) as first-line treatment for symptoms relief. However, the recommendations regarding the classification of ICP, the frequency of bile acid monitoring, the necessity of fetal surveillance, and the optimal timing of delivery are inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: Obstetrics cholestasis is a severely pruritic form of reversible cholestasis of unknown pathophysiology that is associated with significant fetal risks and no definitive treatment. The variations among the existing guidelines reflect the heterogeneity of available evidence, while highlighting the necessity for further research. TARGET AUDIENCE: Obstetricians and gynecologists, family physicians. LEARNING OBJECTIVES: After participating in this activity, the learner should be better able to explain the process of differential diagnosis when ICP is suspected; identify the ICP-associated fetal and maternal risks on which affected individuals should be counseled; and describe the medical treatment options and the optimal timing of 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveySame topicDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsFrench-language works237,207