MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792487801 · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1629023

Neugeborenenscreening

2009· article· de· W2792487801 on OpenAlexaff
Anika Lüders, Oliver Blankenstein, I. Starke, Malte Stopsack, Robin Fingerhut, J. Klein, Mirko Lindner, Catherine Müller, Michael Peter, E. Rauterberg, Mimmi Stehn, W. Schultis, C. Fusch, Alexander Schulze, U. Ceglarek, Uta Nennstiel

Bibliographic record

VenueKinder- und Jugendmedizin · 2009
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGynecologyPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhysicsMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zusammenfassung Das Neugeborenenscreening (NGS) auf behandelbare angeborene metabole und endokrine Störungen ist eine bevölkerungsmedizinische Präventionsmaßnahme mit dem Ziel der vollständigen und frühzeitigen Erkennung sowie der qualitätsgesicherten Therapie aller betroffenen Neugeborenen. Die im NGS untersuchten Erkrankungen können bei zu spätem Behandlungsbeginn zu schweren geistigen und körper-lichen Behinderungen bis hin zum Tod führen. Seit mehr als 30 Jahren wird das Neugeborenen-screening in den meisten Regionen Deutsch-lands angeboten, bislang jedoch ohne verbindliche Regelung zu Inhalten, Durchführung und zur Finanzierung des Screeningprozesses. Am 21.12.2004 gab der gemeinsame Bundesausschuss der Ärzte und Krankenkassen (G-BA) mit der Änderung der Kinderrichtlinien den Weg zur bundesweit einheitlichen Durchführung des erweiterten NGS und einer Finanzierung im ambulanten Bereich frei. Die Deutsche Gesellschaft für das Neugeborenenscreening (DGNS) hat im Auftrag der bundesdeutschen Screeninglaboratorien die Umsetzung der neuen Kinderrichtlinie und der damit verbundenen neuen Qualitätsanforderungen an das NGS evaluiert.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0880.023

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.332 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKinder- und JugendmedizinSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207