MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967766231 · doi:10.1093/neuros/nyz262

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guideline on the Incidence of Shunt-Dependent Hydrocephalus in Infants With Myelomeningocele After Prenatal Versus Postnatal Repair

2019· review· en· W2967766231 on OpenAlexaff
Mandeep S. Tamber, Ann Marie Flannery, Catherine McClung-Smith, Nadege Assassi, David F. Bauer, Alexandra D. Beier, Jeffrey P. Blount, Susan Durham, Paul Klimo, Dimitrios C. Nikas, Patricia Rehring, Rachana Tyagi, Catherine A. Mazzola

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Dysraphism and Malformations
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCongress of Neurological Surgeons
KeywordsMedicineHydrocephalusGuidelinePediatricsPopulationIn uteroNeural tube defectFetal surgeryPrenatal diagnosisSystematic reviewIncidence (geometry)SurgeryMEDLINEPregnancyFetusPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Myelomeningocele (MM) is a condition that is responsible for considerable morbidity in the pediatric population. A significant proportion of the morbidity related to MM is attributable to hydrocephalus and the surgical management thereof. Postnatal repair remains the most common form of treatment; however, increased rates of prenatal diagnosis, advances in fetal surgery, and a hypothesis that neural injury continues in utero until the MM defect is repaired have led to the development and evaluation of prenatal surgery as a means to improve outcomes in afflicted infants. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this guideline is to systematically evaluate the literature to determine whether there is a difference in the proportion of patients who develop shunt-dependent hydrocephalus in infants who underwent prenatal MM repair compared to infants who had postnatal repair. METHODS: The Guidelines Task Force developed search terms and strategies used to search PubMed and Embase for relevant literature published between 1966 and September 2016. Strict inclusion/exclusion criteria were used to screen abstracts and to develop a list of relevant articles for full-text review. Full-text articles were then reviewed, and when appropriate, included as evidence. RESULTS: A total of 87 abstracts were identified and reviewed by 3 independent reviewers. Thirty-nine full-text articles were selected for analysis. Three studies met selection criteria and were included in the evidence table. CONCLUSION: Class I evidence from 1 study and class III evidence from 2 studies suggest that, in comparison to postnatal repair, prenatal surgery for MM reduces the risk of developing shunt-dependent hydrocephalus. Therefore, prenatal repair of MM is recommended for those fetuses who meet specific criteria for prenatal surgery to reduce the risk of developing shunt-dependent hydrocephalus (level I). Differences between prenatal and postnatal repair with respect to the requirement for permanent cerebrospinal fluid diversion should be considered alongside other relevant maternal and fetal factors when deciding upon a preferred method of MM closure. The full guideline can be found at https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-spina-bifida-chapter-2.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.104
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.104
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.011
Bibliometrics0.0310.020
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurosurgerySame topicSpinal Dysraphism and MalformationsFrench-language works237,207