MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967211497 · doi:10.1080/14789450.2019.1654863

Postnatal gestational age estimation via newborn screening analysis: application and potential

2019· article· en· W2967211497 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsay A. Wilson, Malia S. Q. Murphy, Robin Ducharme, Kathryn M. Denize, Nafisa M. Jadavji, Beth K. Potter, Julian Little, Pranesh Chakraborty, Steven Hawken, Kumanan Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Proteomics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaNewborn Screening OntarioChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestational ageMedicineEstimationNewborn screeningObstetricsComputer sciencePregnancyPediatricsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Preterm birth is a major global health concern, contributing to 35% of all neonatal deaths in 2016. Given the importance of accurately ascertaining estimates of preterm birth and in light of current limitations in postnatal gestational age (GA) estimation, novel methods of estimating GA postnatally in the absence of prenatal ultrasound are needed. Previous work has demonstrated the potential for metabolomics to estimate GA by analyzing data captured through routine newborn screening.Areas covered: Circulating analytes found in newborn blood samples vary by GA. Leveraging newborn screening and demographic data, our group developed an algorithm capable of estimating GA postnatally to within approximately 1 week of ultrasound-validated GA. Since then, we have built on the model by including additional analytes and validating the model’s performance through internal and external validation studies, and through implementation of the model internationally.Expert opinion: Currently, using metabolomics to estimate GA postnatally holds considerable promise but is limited by issues of cost-effectiveness and resource access in low-income settings. Future work will focus on enhancing the precision of this approach while prioritizing point-of-care testing that is both accessible and acceptable to individuals in low-resource settings.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of ProteomicsSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207