MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Patterns of infant mortality caused by major congenital anomalies

2000· article· en· W2072431855 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shi Wu Wen, Shiliang Liu, K.S. Joseph, Jocelyn Rouleau, Alexander C. Allen

Bibliographic record

VenueTeratology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnencephalyInfant mortalityMedicinePediatricsSpina bifidaPregnancyPopulationFetusBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We assessed the impact of recent advances in perinatal care on infant mortality due to congenital anomaly. METHODS: Analysis of trends in congenital anomaly-attributed infant mortality, using the 1981-1995 Statistics Canada's birth and death records, with a total of 2,878,826 live births, 21,883 infant deaths, and 6, 908 infant deaths due to congenital anomalies. RESULTS: Infant mortality due to major congenital anomaly decreased from 3.11 per 1, 000 live births in 1981 to 1.89 per 1,000 live births in 1995. Cause-specific infant mortality rates for anencephaly, spina bifida, other central nervous system anomalies, cardiovascular system anomalies, respiratory system anomalies, digestive system anomalies, certain musculoskeleton anomalies, urinary system anomalies, chromosomal anomalies, and multiple congenital anomalies were 0.20, 0.23, 0.27, 1.04, 0.24, 0.08, 0.22, 0.16, 0.22, and 0.13 per 1,000 live births, respectively, in 1981-1983, whereas corresponding rates were 0.07, 0.07, 0.18, 0.73, 0.25, 0.03, 0.12, 0.12, 0.26, and 0.06 per 1,000 live births, respectively, in 1993-1995. CONCLUSIONS: Recent Canadian data show that infant deaths caused by major congenital anomalies have decreased significantly, but reductions varied substantially according to specific forms of anomalies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations65
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeratologySame topicFolate and B Vitamins ResearchFrench-language works237,207