MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2285085798 · doi:10.1159/000443958

Congenital Hypothyroidism: Long-Term Experience with Early and High Levothyroxine Dosage

2016· article· en· W2285085798 on OpenAlexaff
Marie Uyttendaele, Sophie Lambert, Sylvie Tenoutasse, Emese Boros, France Ziereisen, Guy Van Vliet, Claudine Heinrichs, Cécile Brachet

Bibliographic record

VenueHormone Research in Paediatrics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLevothyroxineMedicineThyroidCongenital hypothyroidismPediatricsDysgenesisGoiterPopulationInternal medicineEndocrinologyGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To assess the management and outcome of the congenital hypothyroidism (CH) patients followed at our institution since the introduction of systemic neonatal screening for CH. STUDY DESIGN: The records of 139 CH patients referred to our center between 1978 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Biochemical and imaging data at diagnosis, initial treatment and growth were analyzed. RESULTS: 111 patients had thyroid dysgenesis (64 ectopy, 46 athyreosis and 1 hypoplasia) and 28 patients had a gland in situ (17 dyshormonogenesis/goiter and 11 normal-sized gland). Levothyroxine treatment was initiated at a median age of 11 days with a mean dose of 11.4 µg/kg/day. Compared to those with ectopy, patients with athyreosis had higher thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and lower thyroxine at diagnosis as well as more delayed bone maturation. Between 1978 and 2014, we observed earlier treatment and earlier TSH normalization. Birth auxology was slightly above the mean of the reference population. Growth at 1 and 6 years and school progression at 11 years were similar to those of the reference population. CONCLUSION: Ectopy is the commonest cause of CH. Children with CH treated early with a mean levothyroxine dose of 11.4 µg/kg/day had a median TSH of 3.07 mU/l at 1 month of age and normal growth.

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)0.000
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHormone Research in PaediatricsSame topicThyroid Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207