Variability in antenatal prognostication of fetal diaphragmatic hernia across the North American Fetal Therapy Network (NAFTNet)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate variability in antenatal sonographic prognostication of congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) within the North American Fetal Therapy Network (NAFTNet). METHODS: NAFTNet centre were invited to complete a questionnaire and participate in videoconference calls, during which participants were observed while measuring lung area by ultrasound using the anteroposterior (AP) method, longest method, and trace method. Each center identified 1-2 experienced fetal medicine specialist(s) or medical imaging specialists locally to participate in the study. Practices were compared among NAFTNet centre within and without the fetal endoscopic tracheal occlusion (FETO) consortium. RESULTS: Nineteen participants from 9 FETO center and 30 participants from 17 non-FETO center completed the survey and 31 participants were interviewed and observed while measuring sonographic lung area. All Centres measured observed-to-expected lung-to-head ratio (o/e LHR) or LHR for CDH prognostication. Image selection criteria for lung area measurement were consistent, including an axial section of the chest with clear lung borders and a 4-chamber cardiac view. Lung area measurement methods varied across NAFTNet, with most centre using longest (4/9 FETO vs. 13/29 non-FETO) or trace (3/9 FETO vs. 11/29 non-FETO) method. Centres differed in expected reference ranges for o/e LHR determination and whether the lowest, highest or average o/e LHR was utilized. CONCLUSION: Variability in antenatal sonographic prognostication of CDH was identified across NAFTNet, indicating a need for consensus-based standardization.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".