MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010931106 · doi:10.1159/000086814

Predicting Outcome in Primary Fetal Hydrothorax

2005· article· en· W2010931106 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Klam, Jean‐Luc Bigras, Lynda Hudon

Bibliographic record

VenueFetal Diagnosis and Therapy · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphatic Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHydrothoraxFetusObstetricsGynecologyPregnancySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study examines the role of serial ultrasound in predicting fetal outcomes based on progress, resolution or stability of pleural effusions in primary fetal hydrothorax (PFHT). METHODS: Records from consecutive cases of fetal pleural effusions referred to the fetal echocardiography unit over a 12-year period were reviewed. Study patients underwent thorough investigation to rule out secondary causes of pleural effusions. The clinical course was monitored with serial ultrasound studies every 2 weeks until delivery. Pleurocentesis and pleuroamniotic shunts were performed in select cases of PFHT. Fetal survival was the primary outcome variable. RESULTS: Eighteen of 44 patients referred for perinatal evaluation of fetal pleural effusions met the study criteria for PFHT. Diagnosis was made at 28 +/- 7 weeks and fetuses delivered at 35 +/- 3 weeks' gestational age. Overall survival was 78%. Effusion progression, greater effusion ratios, earlier gestational age at delivery, and lower Apgar scores at birth were associated with poor outcome. Conservative management was appropriate for most cases. CONCLUSIONS: Serial ultrasound studies to evaluate the clinical course of the pleural effusions are essential in the management of PFHT. Expectant management of stable and resolving effusions was appropriate in all cases.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations84
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFetal Diagnosis and TherapySame topicLymphatic Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207