Investigating the Need for Routine Hip Ultrasound to Detect Developmental Dysplasia of the Hips In Babies Born with Breech Presentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND: Breech presentation at birth increases the risk for developmental dysplasia of the hips (DDH). However, international consensus with regards to screening guidelines for infants at increased risk of DDH is lacking. Kingston General Hospital (KGH), a Canadian tertiary care center, currently employs a DDH ultrasound screening protocol at 6 weeks of age for all infants born with breech presentation. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the utility of routine ultrasound scanning in detecting DDH in patients born breech with a negative physical exam of the hips. DESIGN/METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted in which electronic medical records at KGH were reviewed to identify infants born breech who received routine hip ultrasound screening for DDH between 2010 and 2015. Physical exam findings of the hips, ultrasound reports, and subsequent treatment modalities were extracted as well as gestational age, birth weight, and gender. RESULTS: 319 infants born with breech presentation who underwent routine hip ultrasound regardless of physical exam status were identified (192 (60.2%) female; 127 (39.8%) male). 27 (8.5%) had a negative physical exam but a positive finding on ultrasound. The gender distribution of this subset was significantly different than that of the total group (p CONCLUSION: For infants born with breech presentation with a negative physical exam of the hips, consideration could be given to direct routine ultrasound screening for DDH at females only.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".