MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139830931 · doi:10.14740/jcgo229w

Understanding the Limitations of Circulating Cell Free Fetal DNA: An Example of Two Unique Cases

2014· article· en· W2139830931 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cecily A. Clark-Ganheart

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and Obstetrics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsCell-free fetal DNAAmniocentesisTrisomyMedicineAneuploidyFetusPrenatal diagnosisKaryotypeChromosomeGene duplicationObstetricsGeneticsPregnancyBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circulating cell free fetal DNA (cffDNA) is an effective screening modality for fetal aneuploidy. We report two cases of false positive results. The first case involves a female, with self-reported Down syndrome. CffDNA returned positive for trisomy 18 leading to a maternal diagnosis of mosaicism chromosome 18 with normal fetal karyotype. The second case involves a patient with an anomalous fetal ultrasound and cffDNA positive for trisomy 13. Amniocentesis demonstrated a chromosome 8p duplication/deletion. False positive cffDNA may arise in clinical scenarios where diagnostic testing is clearly indicated. Practitioners should recognize the limitations of cffDNA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.089
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.089
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.365
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.021 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and ObstetricsSame topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207