MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133447954 · doi:10.1002/pd.744

Prenatal diagnosis of Apert syndrome: report of two cases

2003· article· en· W2133447954 on OpenAlexaff
David Skidmore, Aditya P. Pai, Ants Toi, Leslie Steele, David Chitayat

Bibliographic record

VenuePrenatal Diagnosis · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCraniofacial Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApert syndromeMedicineSyndactylyPrenatal diagnosisFetusPregnancyCraniosynostosisGestationObstetricsAbnormalitySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two de novo cases with Apert Syndrome detected prenatally are presented herein. In the first, fetal ultrasound findings of syndactyly of the hands, craniosynostosis and proptosis resulted in a prenatal diagnosis in the nineteenth week of gestation. This is the earliest prenatal diagnosis of this syndrome in a not-at-risk case. Following counseling, this pregnancy was terminated and subsequent pathological examination and DNA analysis confirmed the diagnosis of Apert Syndrome and coarctation of the aorta. In the second case, fetal ultrasound at 21 weeks' gestation revealed a hypoplastic left heart and clover-leaf skull. Following counseling, this pregnancy was also terminated. Further examination of the fetus and DNA analysis led to a diagnosis of Apert Syndrome. These cases emphasize the need to complete a thorough fetal ultrasound in cases with potentially lethal cardiac abnormality and the importance of incorporating a fetal pathologist, as well as a medical geneticist, in the investigations performed after delivery or pregnancy termination when a fetal abnormality is detected on ultrasound.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrenatal DiagnosisSame topicCraniofacial Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207