MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Population-Based Trends in Invasive Prenatal Diagnosis for Ultrasound-Based Indications: Two Decades of Change From 1994 to 2016

2019· article· en· W2972434681 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Lostchuck, Alice Poulton, J Halliday, Lisa Hui

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCell-free fetal DNAObstetricsPrenatal diagnosisUltrasoundFetusPrenatal ultrasoundGenetic testingPopulationNuchal translucencySecond trimesterPregnancyAneuploidyGynecologyChromosomeRadiologyGeneticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(Abstracted from Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019;53:503–511) Ultrasound examination, particularly the midtrimester morphology scan, and fetal chromosome analysis provide opportunities for specialist assessment, genetic testing, and perinatal management of pregnancies complicated by fetal anomalies. Advances such as fetal nuchal translucency measurement as part of the combined first-trimester screening (CFTS) test for trisomies 21, 13, and 18; maternal plasma cell-free (cf) DNA-based screening for common aneuploidies; and prenatal diagnosis with chromosomal microarray (CMA) analysis have helped further genetic testing of fetal anomalies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.251 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveySame topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207