Development of a research platform for children with arthrogryposis multiplex congenita: study protocol for a pilot registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Arthrogryposis multiplex congenita (AMC) describes a heterogeneous group of conditions with multiple congenital contractures. These conditions may be attributed to genetic or other factors inducing decreased fetal movements, including maternal and paternal factors. Discovering the underlying genetic pathways has important repercussions for prevention, gene therapy and genetic counselling. The current literature mainly consists of small-scale, single-site studies, limiting comparability and pooling of findings across individual studies. A pilot registry for children presenting with AMC is proposed to provide the framework for a large-scale AMC registry. This registry will provide the platform to support high-quality studies to inform the distribution, clinical practice and genetics contributing to this group of conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The registry will be piloted on 40 families of children from birth to 21 years of age presenting with AMC. Data will be collected on the child (demographic and newborn variables), mother and father (demographic, lifestyle habits and medical history). To promote standardised data collection, a manual of operations will be developed. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarise relevant data, regression analyses will be used to explore associations to generate hypotheses regarding factors contributing to AMC. Qualitative analysis will also be used to better describe the various phenotypes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained at the participating sites. The pilot registry will provide the platform for multisite AMC registry that will generate multiple research avenues to enhance current care and establish new therapies. Following this pilot study, the participant selection criteria will be refined and datasets will be expanded to include rehabilitation and surgical interventions, and genetic sequencing. The best timing for the questionnaire administration and frequency of follow-up prior to the implementation of a multisite AMC registry will be determined.
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 | 0.158 | 0.134 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.067 | 0.020 |
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".