MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084663927 · doi:10.1002/pd.1262

Discordant growth in twins

2005· review· en· W2084663927 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePrenatal Diagnosis · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUmbilical arteryGestationObstetricsIntrauterine growth restrictionEtiologyFetal growthFetusSingle umbilical arteryNeonatologyUltrasoundPregnancyPediatricsInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discordant growth in twins contributes significantly to rates of perinatal morbidity and mortality. These rates vary according to chorionicity, timing of onset and severity. We have reviewed English language literature in Medline since 1980. It is clear that diagnosis of discordant growth has improved due to the use of serial ultrasound examination. Following the detection of differences in fetal size, diagnosis is facilitated by umbilical artery and fetal Doppler studies. Management options vary according to chorionicity, timing of onset and umbilical-fetal Doppler studies. The mode of delivery in discordant twins remains controversial. We conclude that ultrasound surveillance of twin gestations, combining serial biometry and selective Doppler studies, is effective in the recognition of significant intrauterine growth restriction in co-twins. Differences in etiology and management underscore the importance of establishing chorionicity routinely as soon as twin gestation is diagnosed.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.348
Teacher spread0.300 · 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