MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810139938 · doi:10.1097/bpo.0000000000001191

Clubfoot Etiology: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Observational and Randomized Trials

2018· review· en· W2810139938 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHospital for Special Surgery
KeywordsMedicineClubfootOdds ratioMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialObservational studyRelative riskConfidence intervalCochrane LibraryInternal medicinePediatricsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Clubfoot is a common congenital anomaly with multiple potential risk factors. Identification of modifiable risk factors may minimize future incidence of clubfoot. The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically review and analyze the best clinical evidence regarding risk factors associated with clubfoot. METHODS: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched from 1967 to May 11, 2016 for studies reporting risk factors for clubfoot. Randomized trials and observational studies were eligible for inclusion, and assessed in duplicate. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale or Cochrane risk of bias tool; low quality studies were excluded, all randomized trials were included. Two reviewers extracted data independently. This meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Pooled effect estimates for the odds of clubfoot were calculated using random or fixed-effects models based on heterogeneity. RESULTS: Forty-two studies (28 case-control, 10 cohort, 4 randomized trials) comprising 31,844 clubfoot cases and 6,604,013 controls were included. Risk factors associated with increased odds of clubfoot included maternal smoking [odds ratio (OR)=1.65; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.54-1.78], paternal smoking (OR=1.72; 95% CI, 1.05-2.84), maternal body mass index >30 (OR=1.46; 95% CI, 1.29-1.65), family history (OR=7.80; 95% CI, 4.04-15.04), amniocentesis (OR=2.08; 95% CI, 1.34-3.21), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor exposure (OR=1.78; 95% CI, 1.34-2.37) maternal single status (OR=1.17; 95% CI, 1.11-1.23), gestational diabetes (OR=1.40; 95% CI, 1.13-1.72), nulliparity (OR=1.32; 95% CI, 1.19-1.45), male sex (OR=1.68; 95% CI, 1.48-1.94), and aboriginal Australian race (OR=2.35; 95% CI, 1.63-3.38). CONCLUSIONS: Smoking, maternal obesity, family history, amniocentesis, and some selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor exposures are the most clinically relevant exposures associated with increased odds of clubfoot, with family history representing the greatest risk. Recognition of modifiable risk factors may help in counseling patients, and minimizing clubfoot incidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

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.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0370.014
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.308
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.121 · 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