Management of Mild Fetal Pyelectasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare 2 protocols for the antenatal management of isolated mild fetal pyelectasis and perform a cost analysis. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of unilateral and bilateral mild fetal pyelectasis followed at our institution from 2003 to 2006 was conducted. Fetuses with additional congenital anomalies or aneuploidy were excluded. Chi(2) analysis was used, and P < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-four cases were identified, of which the majority were male (75.4% versus 24.6%). Eighty-eight patients were reevaluated every 4 weeks (protocol 1). The remaining 156 patients were reevaluated once in the third trimester (protocol 2). The mean number of ultrasound examinations in protocol 1 was 3.24, at a cost of $1187, compared with protocol 2, at $798. Resolution occurred in 59%, stabilization in 29%, and progression in 12%. There were no cases of progression to severe pyelectasis or a need for in utero intervention in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Mild fetal pyelectasis can be managed with 1 additional third-trimester ultrasound examination without a compromise in patient care. Average cost savings were $389 per patient for protocol 2, suggesting a benefit from this protocol over protocol 1.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".