P02The first results of the ultrasound transvaginal screening in early pregnancies in Kazan city, Tatarstan, Russia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1 January 2000 in order of Tatarstan Health Care Ministry transvaginal first trimester screening was introduced in Kazan city. All pregnant women have to be examined in one of 5 the medical centers. We present the results of six month screening for all pregnant women between 10 and 14 weeks gestation. Method Routine transvaginal ultrasound examination included the measurement of fetal crown‐rump length, nuchal translucency and estimation of fetal anatomy. Results A total 1620 pregnant women of 10–14 weeks of gestation were examined from January till June 2000. All abnormalities were detected at the 12–13 weeks gestational ages. The increasing of nuchal translucency thickness were found in 23 cases, 7 of them chromosomal defects had, in this group in 5 cases cystic hygroma with hydrops were identified. In 12 cases structural anomalies were found: 1‐body stalk anomaly, 1 case‐omphalocele with liver in it, 1‐holoprosencephaly with proboshisis and microphtalmia, 1‐encephalocele, 3‐acrania, 5‐anencephaly. In the cases of holoprosencephaly and encephalocele nuchal translucency measured at 10–11 week was normal. Conclusion Even the first results of early pregnancy transvaginal screening show its great significance in our city. The most adequate period for transvaginal screening is 12–13 weeks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".