MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243101720 · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000000994

The North American Fetal Therapy Network Consensus Statement

2015· review· en· W4243101720 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stephen P. Emery, Mert Ozan Bahtiyar, Kenneth J. Moise

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReferralMultidisciplinary approachIntensive care medicinePregnancyGestationFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief The North American Fetal Therapy Network is a consortium of 30 medical institutions in the United States and Canada with established expertise in fetal therapy and other forms of multidisciplinary care for complex fetal disorders. This publication is the third in a series of articles written by NAFTNet about monochorionic pregnancies. In this article, we provide the general obstetric practitioner with information regarding management options available for complications of monochorionic gestations. This information may be useful for a better understanding of the pathophysiology of the various conditions, for better patient counseling, for timely referral to a regional treatment center, and for ongoing comanagement after treatment. Management strategies for monochorionic complications must account for angioarchitecture and pathophysiology unique to these gestations.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0090.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.008

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations88
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207