MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970892222 · doi:10.1002/uog.1947

Monoamniotic twins discordant for anencephaly managed conservatively with good outcomes: two case reports and a review of the literature

2005· review· en· W1970892222 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth Lim, Colleen Dy, D. Pugash, Keith Philip Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnencephalyObstetricsPregnancyTwin PregnancyPediatricsGestationFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monoamniotic twin pregnancy discordant for anencephaly (MATDA) is a rare occurrence with only seven prior reported cases. Selective termination has been advocated in managing discordant monoamniotic twins. We report two cases managed expectantly with good outcomes and review other previously reported cases. The first case was a primigravid woman diagnosed with MATDA at 18 weeks. She was managed expectantly until 32 + 5 weeks when a Cesarean section was performed for preterm labor. The surviving female infant weighed 1610 g. The second case was a multigravid woman who was diagnosed with MATDA at 17 + 5 weeks and was managed as an outpatient. An emergency Cesarean section was performed at 31 weeks for non-reassuring monitoring and the surviving male infant weighed 1790 g. In both cases, the survivors were discharged home in good condition. A review of these two cases and those in the literature suggests that expectant management should be considered among management options for this rare condition.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.295 · 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
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

Citations17
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207