MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038952173 · doi:10.1186/s12891-020-03454-4

Predicting developmental dysplasia of the hip in at-risk newborns

2020· article· en· W3038952173 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas Roposch, Evangelia Protopapa, Olivia Malaga-Shaw, Yael Gelfer, Paul Humphries, Deborah Ridout, John H. Wedge

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersGreat Ormond Street Hospital CharityNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicinePopulationProspective cohort studyPediatricsDysplasiaCohort studyObstetricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The development of developmental dysplasia of the hip can be attributed to several risk factors and often in combination with each other. When predicting the likelihood of developing this condition, clinicians tend to over and underestimate its likelihood of occurring. Therefore, the study aim is to determine among at-risk newborns how to best predict developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) within 8 weeks post-partum. METHODS: Prospective cohort study in secondary care. Patient population included newborns at-risk for DDH - we assessed 13,276 consecutive newborns for the presence of DDH risk factors. Only newborns with at least one of the predefined risk factors and those showing an abnormal examination of the hip were enrolled (n = 2191). For the development of a risk prediction model we considered 9 candidate predictors and other variables readily available at childbirth. The main outcome measure was ultrasonography at a median age of 8 weeks using consensus diagnostic criteria; outcome assessors were blinded. RESULTS: The risk model includes four predictors: female sex (OR = 5.6; 95% CI: 2.9-10.9; P < 0.001); first degree family history of DDH (OR = 4.5; 95% CI: 2.3-9.0; P < 0.001), birthweight > 4000 g (OR = 1.6; 95% CI: 0.6-4.2; P = 0.34), and abnormal examination of hip (OR = 58.8; 95% CI: 31.9, 108.5; P < 0.001). This model demonstrated excellent discrimination (C statistic = 0.9) and calibration of observed and predicted risk (P = 0.35). A model without the variable 'hip examination' demonstrated similar performance. CONCLUSION: The risk model quantifies absolute risk of DDH within 8 weeks postpartum in at-risk newborns. Based on clinical variables readily available at the point of childbirth, the model will enhance parental counselling and could serve as the basis for real time decisions prior to discharge from maternity wards.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.625

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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

Citations28
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersSame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207