Sonographic examination of the fetal central nervous system: guidelines for performing the ‘basic examination’ and the ‘fetal neurosonogram’
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
Central nervous system (CNS) malformations are some of the most common of all congenital abnormalities. Neural tube defects are themost frequent CNS malformations and amount to about 1–2 cases per 1000 births. The incidence of intracranial abnormalities with an intact neural tube is uncertain as probably most of these escape detection at birth and only become manifest in later life. Long-term follow-up studies suggest however that the incidence may be as high as one in 100 births1. Ultrasound has been used for nearly 30 years as the main modality to help diagnose fetal CNS anomalies. The scope of these guidelines is to review the technical aspects of an optimized approach to the evaluation of the fetal brain in surveys of fetal anatomy, that will be referred to in this document as a basic examination. Detailed evaluation of the fetal CNS (fetal neurosonogram) is also possible but requires specific expertise and sophisticated ultrasound machines. This type of examination, at times complemented by three-dimensional ultrasound, is indicated in pregnancies at increased risk of CNS anomalies. In recent years fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a promising new technique that may add important information in selected cases and mainly after 20–22 weeks, although its advantage over ultrasound remains debated
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 | 0.002 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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