MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Study of 24 cases with congenital esophageal atresia: What are the risk factors?

2006· article· en· W2157672176 on OpenAlex
Kiminobu Sugito, Tsugumichi Koshinaga, Mayumi Hoshino, Mikiya Inoue, Hiroshi Gotô, Taro Ikeda, Noritsugu Hagiwara

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatrics International · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal and GI Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtresiaTracheoesophageal fistulaAnastomosisEsophagusApgar scoreRetrospective cohort studyBirth weightGroup BSurgeryPediatricsPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recovery from esophageal atresia (EA) and tracheoesophageal fistula (TEF) has improved markedly over the years. But postoperative complications, however, have remained. This study evaluates recovery, preoperative, and postoperative status of patients with EA/TEF. METHODS: A retrospective study review was undertaken in 24 patients with EA/TEF after primary anastomosis (January 1975 through September 2003). RESULTS: There were no patients who had major cardiac anomalies or trisomy 18. In total, 17 of 24 (70.8%, group A) patients have survived and seven (29.2%, group B) have died. Birthweight and Apgar Scores in group A were significantly higher than in group B. The ratio of GAP (the distance of the location of the blind pouch from the ends of the upper and lower esophagus) to body length in group B was significantly higher than in group A. The birthweight and Apgar Scores in group A were significantly higher than in group B. When the authors compared their sample of cases by means of the Waterston classification, the Montreal classification and the Spitz classification, there were statistically significant differences between the results using the Waterston classification and the results using to the Spitz classification. CONCLUSION: For the cases of EA surgery that were examined, the authors concluded that bodyweight at birth and the existence of pre-surgery respiratory system complications have a significant effect on post-surgery recovery, and that results appear to indicate the importance of classification using the Waterston classification and Spitz classification as a means of assessing the degree of risk. Results also appeared to indicate that the control of Respiratory Distress Syndrome throughout both the pre-surgery and post-surgery periods is critical.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.252 · 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