The prevalence of amnion rupture sequence, limb body wall defects and body wall defects in Alberta 1980–2012 with a review of risk factors and familial cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prevalence rates of amnion rupture sequence, limb body wall defect, and body wall defects vary widely. Comparisons are difficult due to small case numbers and the lack of agreement of definition, classification, and pathogenesis. This study reports the prevalence of cases classified in five distinct categories. The Alberta Congenital Anomalies Surveillance System data on live births, stillbirths, and terminations of pregnancy (<20 weeks gestation) occurring between 1980 through 2012 with the ICD-10 Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health Adaptation codes used for congenital constriction bands (Q79.80) and body wall complex (Q89.7) were reviewed. During the 33-year-study period, there were 153 eligible cases ascertained from 1,411,652 live births and stillbirths, giving a prevalence of 1.08/10,000 total births. There were more males (52%) than females (45%) and 3% were of unknown sex. The average maternal age, birth weight, and gestation was 27 years, 2,701 g, and 35 weeks, respectively. Limb deficiencies occurred in 78% of cases. Amniotic bands with limb deficiency was the most common phenotype (48%). Digital limb deficiency was the most frequent type (56%); however, cases with body wall defects had more severe types of limb deficiencies. The upper limbs only were affected more times (44%), and there was no side preference. Most cases are sporadic but a number of familial occurrences have been reported although some have insufficient documentation and others misdiagnosed. A review of putative risk factors gives conflicting results. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".