MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 17195: Accuracy of Fetal Echocardiography in the Current Era

2018· article· en· W4213247315 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kim Haberer, Angela McBrien, Aisling Young, Winnie Savard, Luke Eckersley, Timothy Colen, Lisa K. Hornberger

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFetal echocardiographyFetusPregnancyAutopsyHeart diseaseCardiologyRadiologyPrenatal diagnosisInternal medicineObstetrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accuracy of Fetal Echocardiography in Defining Anatomical Details of Fetal Cardiac Pathology in the Current Era Background: Enhanced ultrasound technology and improvements in prenatal detection have provided opportunities to fine-tune fetal cardiac diagnoses. We sought to determine the accuracy of fetal echocardiography in defining anatomical details of major structural fetal heart disease(FHD) Methods: We queried the fetal echo database at the University of Alberta to identify pregnancies with a major FHD diagnosis between 2007-2018. We excluded simple septal defects, minor valve abnormalities and isolated coarctation. FHD was divided into 12 major categories to examine differences within subtypes. Fetal echocardiography reports were compared to post-natal echocardiography or autopsy when available, to assess segmental anatomy. Differences were described according to the following categories:1) No difference between fetal and postnatal findings 2) Minor differences with no impact on outcome (left superior vena cava), 3) Minor differences that could make a minor difference to the delivery plan or surgery (e.g. vascular ring), 4) Major differences that could lead to a change in the course of pregnancy, delivery or surgical planning (e.g. ductal dependency); 5) Errors of categorization that did not alter surgical planning but could have changed counseling (e.g. associations with extra-cardiac pathology). Results: In the study period 744 pregnancies with major FHD were encountered of which 151 (20.3%) had pregnancy termination, 43(6%) intrauterine demise, 6(1%) were lost to followup. 524(71%) were liveborn. Of the 744, 542 (524 echo and 18 autopsy) had confirmation of full cardiac anatomy. Table 1 details the number of cases in whom differences were demonstrated. Conclusion: Fetal echocardiography in the current era is highly accurate with few serious errors. Delineating the anatomy of the outflow tracts in complex cardiac lesions remains a challenge

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCongenital Heart Disease Studies→French-language works237,207→