Is Routine Amniocentesis for Advanced Maternal Age Still Indicated?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a policy of selective rather than routine use of amniocentesis for advanced maternal age. METHOD: A consecutive series of 359 pregnant women aged 38-47 underwent nuchal translucency measurement (NTM) at 10-14 weeks, maternal serum screening (MSS) by alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) at 15-17 weeks, and second trimester ultrasound at 21-23 weeks. Women with NTM <3 mm, MSS-derived risk <1/250, and a normal second trimester sonography were considered at low risk and were suggested not to have an amniocentesis. RESULTS: Either the NTM or MSS test was positive in 130 women; 105 (81%) of them elected to have an amniocentesis, versus 122 (53%) of 229 in whom both tests were negative (p < 0.001). Nineteen (5%) of 359 patients had NTM > or =3 mm; all 7 cases of Down's syndrome were in this group; 122 (34%) of 359 patients had a MSS-derived risk > or =1/250; 6 of the 7 cases of Down's syndrome were in this group: Ten patients had an abnormal second trimester ultrasound, 1 of which had trisomy 18. Of the 219 patients with MSS-derived risk <1/250, a NTM <3 mm, and a normal second trimester ultrasound, none had a baby with a chromosomal abnormality (95% confidence interval: 0-1.4%). CONCLUSION: Amniocentesis may be offered on a selective rather than routine basis in women over 38, based upon the results of noninvasive screening tests.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".