MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056663555 · doi:10.1002/ca.21149

Noninvasive investigation of asymmetrically conjoined tripus twins with features of rachipagus, parapagus dicephalus, and cephalopagus

2011· article· en· W2056663555 on OpenAlexaff
A.W. Lee, B. Farnquist, Omar Islam, Jennifer MacKenzie, Sherryl A. Taylor, Stephen C. Pang, C. W. Reifel

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Anatomy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConjoined twinsMedicineAnencephalyAnatomyCrystal twinningMaldevelopmentFetusPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hypothetical mechanism for conjoined twinning postulated by Spencer ([2003] Developmental Malformations and Clinical Implications, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, p 1-476) suggests that, after separation, monovular twins fuse in one of eight predictable homologous sites. The tripus fetal specimen under study embodies characteristics of three types therefore preventing it from classification into a simple variant of any one of the eight twin types described by Spencer. The aim of this study was to reveal internal structural anomalies of the fetal specimen by using magnetic resonance imaging and computerized tomography. Dorsally appended to the primary twin is a secondary head mass (brain tissue and ocular globe) and two spinal columns converging at T4/T5, suggesting rachipagus twinning. The ventral orientation of the secondary twin's (right lateral) lower limb suggests parapagus twinning. The caudal divergence of the spinal columns and the presence of a secondary hemipelvis, separate from the primary pelvis, suggest cephalopagus twinning. Measurements of the long bones indicate a gestational age of ∼20-23 weeks. Secondary malformations of the primary fetal body include anencephaly, cleft palate, renal agenesis, decreased left ventricular outflow, and a prematurely terminating descending aorta. This study demonstrates the possibility of using current imaging techniques to study very old, formalin-preserved human material for documentation and scientific discussion without destroying the specimen, thus keeping it intact for posterity.

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)0.001
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical AnatomySame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207