MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905046022 · doi:10.1002/bdr2.1438

Prevalence rates of spina bifida in Alberta, Canada: 2001–2015. Can we achieve more prevention?

2018· review· en· W2905046022 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBirth Defects Research · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nutrition SocietyAlberta HealthHealth CanadaAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpina bifidaFolic acidMedicineNeural tube defectPediatricsPregnancyNoticeMicronutrientPublic healthAnencephalyObstetricsEnvironmental healthFetusInternal medicinePathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite a substantial prevention of neural tube defects with mandatory folic acid (FA) fortification, a significant number of cases still exist in Alberta, Canada, particularly spina bifida (SB). The purpose of this study was to review cases with SB to provide a possible explanation as to why SB is still prevalent in Alberta. METHODS: Cases with SB born between 2001 and 2015, ascertained by the Alberta Congenital Anomalies Surveillance System, were reviewed. Cases were classified as lipomeningomyelocele, syndrome/recognized condition, chromosome, associated multiple congenital anomalies, and isolated. The notice of birth forms were reviewed to determine FA supplement use before and/or during pregnancy. Socioeconomic status (SES) was also examined. RESULTS: The majority of cases were isolated (58%). The total prevalence of SB for 2001-2015 was 0.37/1,000 births, with isolated SB being 0.21/1,000 births. Urinary and congenital heart defects were the most frequently identified associated anomalies. FA supplementation could not be determined for 69% of our cases because of a lack of completeness of the notice of birth forms. There was no significant difference regarding SES between mothers of cases and all mothers in Alberta. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to examine cases with isolated SB to determine why mandatory FA fortification has not completely prevented SB and to identify which cases are not folate-responsive. A more concerted effort of public health education and promotion with the identification of women with suboptimal folate status and a better understanding of the role of other micronutrients is necessary.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.327 · 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