The Distribution of Congenital Anomalies Within the VACTERL Association Among Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonist-exposed Pregnancies Is Similar to the General Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the distribution of congenital anomalies within the VACTERL association (vertebral defects, anal atresia, cardiac, tracheoesophageal, renal, and limb abnormalities) between patients exposed to tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) antagonist and the general population. METHODS: Analysis for comparison of proportional differences to a previous publication between anomaly subgroups, according to subgroup definitions of the European Surveillance of Congenital Anomalies (EUROCAT), a population-based database. RESULTS: Most EUROCAT subgroups belonging to the VACTERL association contained only one or 2 records of TNF-α antagonist exposure, so comparison of proportions was imprecise. Only the category "limb abnormalities" showed a significantly higher proportion in the general population. CONCLUSION: The high number of congenital anomalies belonging to the VACTERL association from a report of pregnancies exposed to TNF-α antagonists could not be confirmed using a population-based congenital anomaly database.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".