First-Trimester Screening for Trisomies 21 and 18
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Screening for aneuploid pregnancies is routinely performed after 15 weeks of gestation and has a sensitivity of approximately 65 percent, with a false positive rate of 5 percent. First-trimester markers of aneuploidy have been developed, but their use in combination has not been adequately evaluated in clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter study of screening for trisomies 21 and 18 among patients with pregnancies between 74 and 97 days of gestation, based on maternal age, maternal levels of free beta human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, and ultrasonographic measurement of fetal nuchal translucency. A screening result was considered to be positive for trisomy 21 if the calculated risk was at least 1 in 270 pregnancies and positive for trisomy 18 if the risk was at least 1 in 150. RESULTS: Screening was completed in 8514 patients with singleton pregnancies. This approach to screening identified 85.2 percent of the 61 cases of Down's syndrome (95 percent confidence interval, 73.8 to 93.0), with a false positive rate of 9.4 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 8.8 to 10.1). At a false positive rate of 5 percent, the detection rate was 78.7 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 66.3 to 88.1). Screening identified 90.9 percent of the 11 cases of trisomy 18 (95 percent confidence interval, 58.7 to 99.8), with a 2 percent false positive rate. Among women 35 years of age or older, screening identified 89.8 percent of fetuses with trisomy 21, with a false positive rate of 15.2 percent, and 100 percent of fetuses with trisomy 18. CONCLUSIONS: First-trimester screening for trisomies 21 and 18 on the basis of maternal age, maternal levels of free beta human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, and measurement of fetal nuchal translucency has good sensitivity at an acceptable false positive rate.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".