Celostna obravnava novorojenčka in dojenčka z okvaro brahialnega pleteža – predlog slovenskih smernic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impairment of brachial plexus (IBP) in the neonate and infant remains an important problem. Risk factors for IBP are well known, but the mechanisms of impairment are not yet fully understood. It is important to identify early signs of IBP and to evaluate the hand function. In the guidelines we propose to use the Toronto scale for evaluation of hand function. The newborn with IBP should be referred to physiotherapy, and then regularly followed-up once a month. If the arm and hand function, especially flexion of the elbow, is not improving at the age of two months, the infant should be referred to the tertiary level rehabilitation centre and to department for plastic surgery at the University Medical Centre in Ljubljana. When necessary, the reconstructive procedure should be done by the age of three to six months. After reconstruction of brachial plexus, the child needs a comprehensive therapy program, which involves passive stretching, sensory stimulation, exercises to promote the development of active voluntary movements, bimanual activities, and symmetrical posture and movement patterns.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".