Fetal myelomeningocele surgery: Only treating the tip of the iceberg
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Fetal myelomeningocele (fMMC) surgery improves infant outcomes when compared with postnatal surgery. Surgical selection criteria and the option of pregnancy termination, however, limit the number of cases that are eligible for prenatal surgery. We aimed to quantify what proportion of cases could ultimately benefit from fetal therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all cases of fMMC referred to a large tertiary care center over a 10-year period and assessed their eligibility for fetal surgery, pregnancy termination rates, and actual uptake of the surgery. RESULTS: Of 158 cases, 67 (42%) were ineligible for fetal surgery based on surgical exclusion criteria. Eleven fetuses (7%) had chromosomal anomalies, 10 of which (91%) had other anomalies on ultrasound. Thirty-four patients had a combination of maternal and fetal contraindications. Of the remaining 91 eligible cases (58%), 45 (49%) pregnancies were terminated, leaving only 46 (29% of initial 158 cases) as potential candidates for fetal repair. Actual uptake of fetal surgery was 15% (n = 14 of 91), but this increased after a national program was started. CONCLUSION: Only a minority of fMMC cases will ultimately undergo fetal surgery. These numbers support the centralization of care in expert centers.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it