MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151664980 · doi:10.1093/pch/15.9.590

Newborn screening for cystic fibrosis in Alberta: Two years of experience

2010· article· en· W2151664980 on OpenAlexaffabout
Margaret Lilley, Susan Christian, Stacey Hume, Patrick Scott, Mark Montgomery, Lisa Semple, Peter Zuberbuhler, Joan Tabak, Fiona Bamforth, Martin J. Somerville

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's HospitalAlberta Children's HospitalAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCystic fibrosisNewborn screeningMedicineMutationPopulationPediatricsGenetic counselingInternal medicineGeneticsBiologyEnvironmental healthGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On April 1, 2007, Alberta became the first province in Canada to introduce cystic fibrosis (CF) to its newborn screening program. The Alberta protocol involves a two-tier algorithm involving an immunoreactive trypsinogen measurement followed by molecular analysis using a CF panel for 39 mutations. Positive screens are followed up with sweat chloride testing and an assessment by a CF specialist. Of the 99,408 newborns screened in Alberta during the first two years of the program, 221 had a positive CF newborn screen. The program subsequently identified and initiated treatment in 31 newborns with CF. A relatively high frequency of the R117H mutation and the M1101K mutation was noted. The M1101K mutation is common in the Hutterite population. The presence of the R117H mutation has created both counselling and management dilemmas. The ability to offer CF transmembrane regulator full sequencing may help resolve diagnostic dilemmas. Counselling and management challenges are created when mutations are mild or of unknown clinical significance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.326 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207