MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040523516 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.c.30317

Cloacal exstrophy: An epidemiologic study from the International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Surveillance and Research

2011· review· en· W2040523516 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part C Seminars in Medical Genetics · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health Services
FundersInstituto de Salud Carlos IIICenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsOmphaloceleCloacal exstrophyCloacaImperforate anusBladder exstrophyMedicineAbdominal wallPregnancySurgeryBiologyAnatomyFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloacal exstrophy presents as a complex abdominal wall defect thought to result from a mesodermal abnormality. Anatomically, its main components are Omphalocele, bladder Exstrophy and Imperforate anus. Other associated malformations include renal malformations and Spine defects (OEIS complex). Historically, the prevalence ranges from 1 in 200,000 to 400,000 births, with higher rates in females. Cloacal exstrophy is likely etiologically heterogeneous as suggested by its recurrence in families and occurrence in monozygotic twins. The defect has been described in infants with limb-body wall, with trisomy 18, and in one pregnancy exposed to Dilantin and diazepam. Due to its rarity, the use of a nonspecific diagnostic code for case identification, and lack of validation of the clinical findings, cloacal exstrophy remains an epidemiologic challenge. The purpose of this study was to describe the prevalence, associated anomalies and maternal characteristics among infants born with cloacal exstrophy. We used data from the International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Surveillance and Research submitted from 18 birth defect surveillance programs representing 24 countries. Cases were clinically evaluated locally and reviewed centrally by two authors. Cases of persistent cloaca were excluded. A total of 186 cases of cloacal exstrophy were identified. Overall prevalence was 1 in 131,579 births: ranging from 1 in 44,444 births in Wales to 1 in 269,464 births in South America. Live birth prevalence was 1 in 184,195 births. Prevalence ratios did not vary by maternal age. Forty-two (22.6%) cases met the criteria for the OEIS complex, whereas 60 (32.3%) were classified as OEI and 18 (9.7%) as EIS (one with suspected VATER (0.5%)). Other findings included two cases with trisomy 13 (one without a karyotype confirmation), one with mosaic trisomy 12 (0.5%), one with mosaic 45,X (0.5%) and one classified as having amnion band sequence (0.5%). Twenty-seven (14.5%) infants had other anomalies unrelated to cloacal exstrophy. Cloacal exstrophy is a rare anomaly with variability in prevalence by geographic location. The proportion of cases classified as OEIS complex was lower in this study than previously reported. Among all cases, 54.8% were reported to have an omphalocele.

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.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.287 · 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