Bibliographic record
Abstract
Level-4Club-foot Introduction Clubfoot is a congenital foot deformity, where etiology is unknown in [90 % of cases.One possible etiology is retained fetal position that did not mature during a full-term pregnancy into a normally-positioned and moveable limb.We sought to explore whether gestational age of the newborn and/or other characteristics impact clubfoot outcome and developmental milestones.Materials and methods Data was collected retrospectively regarding babies born between 2008 and 2014 who were followed until independent walking age.Clubfoot severity score at each stage, number of casts, age at completion of casting, and achievement of developmental milestones (age and clubfoot score) were correlated with length of pregnancy and neonatal demographics.Results 150 babies were included (95 males, 55 females); 22 babies were born preterm (\37 weeks).There was no significant difference in initial Pirani score between groups in numbers of casts required or in rates of Achilles tenotomy.Syndromic background was found to be correlated with delayed achievement of milestones and longer treatment course (more casts or need for tenotomy).Although preterm babies achieve developmental milestones at a later age, their clubfoot status is comparable to that of full-term at each milestone.Conclusion Clubfoot presentation and management course is similar in preterm neonates as in full-term neonates.Significance Prematurity in itself does not pose a specific adverse risk for clubfoot management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.692 | 0.460 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".