MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1931318723 · doi:10.1093/pch/11.2.93

Perinatal brachial plexus palsy

2006· article· ca· W1931318723 on OpenAlexaff
John Andersen, Joe Watt, Jaret L. Olson, John Van Aerde

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2006
Typearticle
Languageca
FieldMedicine
TopicNerve Injury and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineShoulder dystociaBrachial plexusPalsyRandomized controlled trialNatural historyBirth injuryCochrane LibraryBrachial plexus injuryCINAHLPregnancyParalysisSurgeryPediatricsPsychological interventionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Perinatal brachial plexus palsy (PBPP) is a flaccid paralysis of the arm at birth that affects different nerves of the brachial plexus supplied by C5 to T1 in 0.42 to 5.1 infants per 1000 live births. OBJECTIVES: To identify antenatal factors associated with PBPP and possible preventive measures, and to review the natural history as compared with the outcome after primary or secondary surgical interventions. METHODS: A literature search on randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the prevention and treatment of PBPP was performed. EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were searched until June 2005. Key words for searches included 'brachial plexus', 'brachial plexus neuropathy', 'brachial plexus injury', 'birth injury' and 'paralysis, obstetric'. RESULTS: There were no prospective studies on the cause or prevention of PBPP. Whereas birth trauma is said to be the most common cause, there is some evidence that PBPP may occur before delivery. Shoulder dystocia and PBPP are largely unpredictable, although associations of PBPP with shoulder dystocia, infants who are large for gestational age, maternal diabetes and instrumental delivery have been reported. The various forms of PBPP, clinical findings and diagnostic measures are described. Recent evidence suggests that the natural history of PBPP is not all favourable, and residual deficits are estimated at 20% to 30%, in contrast with the previous optimistic view of full recovery in greater than 90% of affected children. There were no randomized controlled trials on nonoperative management. There was no conclusive evidence that primary surgical exploration of the brachial plexus supercedes conservative management for improved outcome. However, results from nonrandomized studies indicated that children with severe injuries do better with surgical repair. Secondary surgical reconstructions were inferior to primary intervention, but could still improve arm function in children with serious impairments. CONCLUSIONS: It is not possible to predict which infants are at risk for PBPP, and therefore amenable to preventive measures. Twenty-five per cent of affected infants will experience permanent impairment and injury. If recovery is incomplete by the end of the first month, referral to a multidisciplinary team is necessary. Further research into prediction, prevention and best mode of treatment needs to be done.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations108
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicNerve Injury and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207