Guidelines review on the use of antenatal corticosteroids for enhanced newborn outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this thesis is to review and compare the most recent guidelines issued by international medical organizations on the use of antenatal corticosteroids to improve perinatal outcomes in pregnancies at risk of preterm birth. The thesis examines recommendations from the World Health Organization, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. It discusses the recommended timing for corticosteroid administration, including extremely preterm and late preterm births, as well as planned cesarean delivery. Additional scenarios such as multiple gestation, prelabor rupture of membranes, diabetes, fetal growth restriction, and hypertensive disorders are addressed. The review also evaluates the current evidence on repeat and rescue courses. While antenatal corticosteroids remain a cornerstone of perinatal care, ongoing research is needed regarding their long-term effects. An individualized, evidence-based approach is emphasized to ensure optimal benefit with minimal risk.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".