MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1539621198

Developing a National Newborn Screening Strategy for Canada

2010· article· en· W1539621198 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kumanan Wilson, Shelley Kennedy, Beth K. Potter, Michael T. Geraghty, Pranesh Chakraborty

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism and Genetic Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsDiseasePopulationNewborn screeningEtiologyIntensive care medicinePsychiatryPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Newborn screening is a population-based program that aims to identify disorders in neonates that could lead to mental retardation or have life-threatening consequences and for which treatments are available. Heel prick blood samples are taken from newborns in the population during the first few days of life and analysed to identify those who are at high risk of particular diseases. Diseases that are targets of newborn screening are generally rare, with the most common disease being congenital hypothyroidism with an incidence of ~1/3000 births. As well, the diseases have in common a pre-clinical phase during which diagnosis may be established, and treatment instituted, before the onset of symptoms that would otherwise bring the baby to clinical attention. The vast majority of diseases targeted by such programs internationally are of genetic etiology. Increasingly, there is interest in additional targets, especially congenital infections such as Human Immunodeficiency Virus, Cytomegalovirus and Toxoplasmosis, where early treatment may be of benefit to the infant. Clinical benefit to the affected infant has been the historical goal of pre-symptomatic diagnosis by newborn screening, in accordance with traditional criteria for disease screening. (1) However, other reasons for newborn screening are being increasingly legitimized. These include reproductive decision-making for parents (given the autosomal recessive heritability of most of the screened diseases), avoidance of lengthy workups for the non-specific symptoms that often herald rare diseases (diagnostic odyssey), and identification of cohorts for investigational therapies that will only be effective early in the course of a disease. (2) An increasing number of jurisdictions are expanding the number of conditions for which they screen, at least partly in response to technological advances (such as the application of tandem mass spectrometry) that have made screening for additional diseases feasible and economical on a mass population basis. However, there is considerable variability across jurisdictions in the diseases for which screening is offered, and this variability is evident in provincial programs in Canada. (3) While there are a multitude of factors that influence the decision on whether or not to screen for a condition, including provincial scientific assessment and prevalence of a condition within a province, there have been calls to nationalize the approach to the various components of newborn screening. (4) In this article we examine the rationale for a national approach and different mechanisms by which the federal government could create a national newborn screening strategy. The state of newborn screening in other countries The practice of newborn screening is reported to occur in at least 64 countries worldwide. (5) At the international level, the disorders targeted by newborn screening vary greatly from country to country. In part, this is due to differential prioritization of disorders based on a variety of factors which include, but are not limited to: prevalence of the target disorders in a given country, clinical practice, availability of treatment for the target disorders, and differential interpretation of both screening criteria and empirical evidence. In particular, the rarity of the screened conditions and the rapid advancement of testing technologies have meant that evidence supporting the clinical benefits of newborn screening has often not been fully available at the time the ability to incorporate additional diseases into screening panels emerged. This in turn has fueled policy debates about the appropriate criteria to justify the expansion of newborn screening programs and whether those criteria have been met for specific diseases or groups of diseases. (6) Even within a given country, such as the United States, there has been considerable variation among states. (7) In response to the recommendations of a task force on newborn screening led by the American Academy of Pediatrics (2000), the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) was commissioned by the Health Services and Resources Administration (HRSA) to develop guidelines for newborn screening, with the aim of producing parity across states. …

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicMetabolism and Genetic DisordersFrench-language works237,207