Gastroschisis and associated defects: An international study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objective was to evaluate the frequency and type of malformations associated with gastroschisis in a large pool of international data, to identify malformation patterns, and to evaluate the role of maternal age in non-isolated cases. Case-by-case information from 24 registries, all members of the International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Surveillance and Research (ICBDSR), were evaluated. After the exclusion of other abdominal wall defects cases were classified as: (a) isolated; (b) recognizable syndrome, chromosomal or not; (c) multiple congenital anomalies (MCA). Our results showed that out of 3,322 total cases 469 non-isolated cases were registered (14.1%): 41 chromosomal syndromes, 24 other syndromes, and 404 MCA. Among MCA four groups of anomalies were most frequent: CNS (4.5%), cardio-vascular (2.5%), limb (2.2%), and kidney anomalies (1.9%). No similar patterns emerged except two patterns resembling limb-body wall complex and OEIS. In both of them the gastroschisis could be however misclassified. Chromosomal trisomies and possibly non-syndromic MCA are associated with an older maternal age more than isolated cases. On consideration of our data and the most valid studies published in the literature, the best estimate of the proportion of gastroschisis associated with major unrelated defects is about 10%, with a few cases associated to recognizable syndromes. Recognized syndromes with gastroschisis seem to be so exceptional that the well documented and validated cases are worth being published as interesting case report. An appropriate case definition in etiological studies should include only isolated gastroschisis after an appropriate definition of isolated and non-isolated cases and a thorough case-by-case review.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".