MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Primary myelomeningocele closure and consequences

2002· review· en· W2318630030 on OpenAlexaff
Wolfgang Wagner, Manfred Schwarz, A. Perneczky

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Urology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Dysraphism and Malformations
Canadian institutionsCanadian Paediatric Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeural tubeContext (archaeology)Closure (psychology)NeurosurgerySpina bifidaNeural tube defectIn uteroIntensive care medicinePediatricsFetusPregnancySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Myelomeningocele, the most frequently occurring open neural tube defect, requires lifelong care of the patient by medical professionals and by relatives. A basic understanding of the neurosurgical measures that have to be taken in the newborn, the infant, the child and the adult is important also for physicians of other disciplines involved in the treatment of patients with myelomeningocele. RECENT FINDINGS: The most recent topic broadly discussed in this context is the role of foetal neurosurgery for closure of the neural tube defect. There is ongoing debate as to whether the beneficial postnatal effects of a prenatal operation in the unborn foetus outweighs the possible complications for the mother as well as the child. SUMMARY: As some of the problems associated with myelomeningocele occur only later in life, it will still take many years until the beneficial, as well as the adverse, effects of prenatal neurosurgical procedures can be evaluated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in UrologySame topicSpinal Dysraphism and MalformationsFrench-language works237,207