MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966680148 · doi:10.1002/jmd2.12025

Hyperornithinemia‐hyperammonemia‐homocitrullinuria syndrome in pregnancy: Considerations for management and review of the literature

2019· article· en· W2966680148 on OpenAlexaff
Bernice Ho, Jennifer MacKenzie, Jagdeep S. Walia, Michael T. Geraghty, Graeme N. Smith, Julie A. Nedvidek, Andrea Guerin

Bibliographic record

VenueJIMD Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism and Genetic Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityKingston General HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperammonemiaPregnancyPediatricsMedicinePopulationDisease managementIntensive care medicineObstetricsDiseaseEndocrinologyInternal medicineBiologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hyperornithinemia-hyperammonemia-homocitrullinuria (HHH) syndrome is a rare metabolic autosomal recessive urea cycle disorder. Only about 100 patients have been reported in the literature. As the population survives into reproductive years, pregnancy management becomes a new challenge for this clinicians. To our knowledge, there are less than three patients with successful pregnancies and deliveries found in the literature with no specific consensus on management or recommendations for HHH syndrome. We reviewed the current literature regarding pregnancy outcomes, combine it with our experience managing a patient through two successful pregnancies and identify a new concern of fetal intrauterine growth restriction. From this, recommendations for pregnancy management are made, including a detailed protocol for clinicians to use for disease management at delivery and in the post-partum period.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJIMD ReportsSame topicMetabolism and Genetic DisordersFrench-language works237,207