MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050059762 · doi:10.1055/s-2002-23555

Fetal Echocardiographic Screening of Pregnancies of Mothers with Anti-Ro and/or Anti-La Antibodies

2002· article· en· W2050059762 on OpenAlexaff
Gordon Gladman, Earl D. Silverman, Yuk-Law, Lily Luy, Christine Boutin, Carl A. Laskin, Jeffrey F. Smallhorn

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Perinatology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyGestationFetusObstetric historyObstetricsInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of this study are to assess the incidence of congenital complete heart block (CCHB) in pregnant women who are anti-Ro and/or La positive. Between January, 1988 and July 1997, 118 pregnancies in 105 women were assessed by fetal echo at 18, 24, and 32 weeks' gestation. Of these 105, 96 had no history of a previous fetus with CCHB; 11(12 pregnancies) a history of a pregnancy with CCHB; and 4 a previous child with cutaneous neonatal lupus erythematosus (CNLE). The 102 pregnancies in 96 women with anti-Ro and/or anti-La antibodies and no history of a previous child with NLB, resulted in 100 live-births with no CCHB. There was 1 dilated cardiomyopathy at 6 months, 1 child with CCHB, and 1 with sclerosis of the endocardium. No case of CCHB was observed in 102 pregnancies without a previous history of CCHB. These results suggest that the risks of CCHB, without a prior history are low.

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)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations79
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PerinatologySame topicCardiovascular Issues in PregnancyFrench-language works237,207