MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020605221 · doi:10.1002/bdra.20129

A proposed mechanism for intermediate atresia ani (AA), based on a porcine case of AA and hypospadias

2005· article· en· W2020605221 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel F. Finnigan, Ken R.S. Fisher, O. E. Vrablic, Winn G. Halina, Gary D. Partlow

Bibliographic record

VenueBirth Defects Research Part A Clinical and Molecular Teratology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital gastrointestinal and neural anomalies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyAtresiaAnatomyFistulaUrethraCloacaSurgeryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Atresia Ani (AA) is one of the most common malformations of the lower gastrointestinal tract. It occurs in 1 in 1500 to 1 in 5000 human births. These patients suffer physically and psychologically from this disorder, and thus there is a research interest in the condition. There are 3 subcategories of AA: high, intermediate, and low. Each of these forms is likely related to separate etiological processes. METHODS: An anatomical study was performed on a porcine case of AA with a urorectal fistula and malformed urethra. RESULTS: This animal was found to have the intermediate form of AA. CONCLUSIONS: A new mechanism is hypothesized, distinct from that described for the high and low forms of AA. This proposed mechanism involves the persistence of the cloacal membrane. Evidence to support this hypothesis includes: location of the urorectal fistula in the region of the embryonic cloacal duct, the lack of anomalies usually seen in conjunction with AA associated with mutations of the Sonic Hedgehog gene, and the presence of a malformed urethra, which is significantly correlated to intermediate AA. This form of AA could be related to a failure of the cloacal membrane to break down at the appropriate time during urorectal separation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBirth Defects Research Part A Clinical and Molecular TeratologySame topicCongenital gastrointestinal and neural anomaliesFrench-language works237,207