MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044132409 · doi:10.5915/44-1-10463

Pilot study of congenital anomaly rates at birth in Fallujah, Iraq, 2010

2012· article· en· W2044132409 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Samira Alaani, M.A.R. Al-Fallouji, Christopher Busby, Malak Hamdan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Islamic Medical Association of North America · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRadioactivity and Radon Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChildren's Health Foundation
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsEpidemiologyGenitourinary systemGeneral hospitalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To examine numbers of congenital anomaly (CA) at birth overall and by class in one clinic in Fallujah General Hospital, Fallujah, Iraq. STUDY DESIGN: All congenital anomaly birth referrals to one pediatric clinician at Fallujah General Hospital for an eleven month period beginning November 1, 2009 were recorded. This clinic was one of three clinics to which cases would be referred. RESULTS: There were 291 CA cases registered at birth in the period at the study's clinic. The total number of births recorded in the hospital over the period was 6049. The CAs included 113 heart and circulatory system cases, 72 nervous system cases, 40 digestive system cases, 9 genitourinary cases, 6 ear, face and neck cases, 7 respiratory cases and 30 Down syndrome cases. CONCLUSION: Owing to difficulties establishing the exact number of births from which these cases were drawn, the exact rates cannot be precisely determined. Nevertheless, on the basis of reasonable assumptions relating to the activity of the clinic involved, these results support earlier epidemiological findings. On the basis of work reported elsewhere, the higher rates of congenital anomalies are believed to be caused by exposure to some genotoxic agent, possibly uranium.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.670

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Islamic Medical Association of North AmericaSame topicRadioactivity and Radon MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207