Cornelia de lange manifestations in otolaryngology: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Cornelia de Lange syndrome (CdLS) is a rare genetic disorder. Our goal was to systematically review the literature regarding otolaryngology manifestations of CdLS. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases for original articles of otolaryngology manifestations for patients with CdLS. These articles were analyzed, and pooled prevalence was calculated. RESULTS: We analyzed 1,310 patients included in 35 case series and 34 case reports. Hearing loss was present for many patients (27 studies), with sensorineural hearing loss affecting 40.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 17.3-63.4) and conductive affecting 22.7% (95% CI: 5.7-39.7). Recurrent acute otitis media was the most frequent infectious manifestation, with 56.5% (95% CI: 34.1-78.4) in seven studies, followed by recurrent airway infections with 44.1% (95% CI: 11.0-87.1) in five studies. Forty-nine (49.7%) percent of patients (95% CI: 25.9-73.6) in nine studies had dysphagia, and 76.6% (95% CI: 59.8-93.3) in four studies had some degree of dysphonia. Craniofacial anomalies were reported in 30 studies, with micrognathia (53.1%; 95% CI: 34.1-72.1) and high arched palate (70.6%; 95% CI: 56.5-84.8) commonly reported. Additional physical exam abnormalities reported included those involving: lips (76.8%; 95% CI: 65.3-88.4), dentition (65.1%; 95% CI: 27.2-100), mouth (85.5%; 95% CI: 76.2-93.8), and eyelashes (87.1%; 95% CI: 77.2-96.9). Sleep-disordered breathing or obstructive sleep apnea affected 25.8% (95% CI: 11.4-40.2) of patients (7 studies). Airway anomalies were reported in 11 case reports. CONCLUSION: This is the first comprehensive evaluation of otolaryngologic manifestations in the CdLS literature. Most reported hearing loss and craniofacial anomalies. Sleep disorders occurred in a minority of patients, whereas airway disorders were primarily reported in case reports. These conditions should be further examined given their potential life-threatening implications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3a Laryngoscope, 130:E122-E133, 2020.
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 | 0.009 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".