MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286567652 · doi:10.1097/fm9.0000000000000156

The Update of Fetal Growth Restriction Associated with Biomarkers

2022· review· en· W4286567652 on OpenAlexaff
Liqun Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueMaternal-Fetal Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFetal growthFetusMedicineBiologyPregnancyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Fetal growth restriction (FGR) has a prevalence of about 10% worldwide and is associated with an increased risk of perinatal mortality and morbidity. FGR is commonly caused by placental insufficiency and can begin early (<32 weeks) or in late (≥32 weeks) gestational age. A false positive antenatal diagnosis may lead to unnecessary monitoring and interventions, as well as cause maternal anxiety. Whereas a false negative diagnosis exposes the fetus to an increased risk of stillbirth and renders the pregnancy ineligible from the appropriate care and potential treatments. The clinical management of FGR pregnancies faces a complex challenge of deciding on the optimal timing of delivery as currently the main solution is to deliver the baby early, but iatrogenic preterm delivery of infants is associated with adverse short- and long-term outcomes. Early and accurate diagnosis of FGR could aid in better stratification of clinical management, and the development and implementation of treatment options, ultimately benefiting clinical care and potentially improving both short- and long-term health outcomes. The aim of this review is to present the new insights on biomarkers of placenta insufficiency, including their current and potential value of biomarkers in the prediction and prevention for FGR, and highlight the association between biomarkers and adverse outcomes in utero to explore the specific mechanism of impaired fetal growth that establish the basis for disease later in life.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaternal-Fetal MedicineSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207