MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307352673 · doi:10.1002/pd.6251

ISPD 2022 debate—When offering a first trimester ultrasound at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks, a detailed review of fetal anatomy should be included

2022· review· en· W4307352673 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lisa Hui, Jo‐Ann Johnson, Mary E. Norton

Bibliographic record

VenuePrenatal Diagnosis · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFetusGestationUltrasoundFirst trimesterSecond trimesterObstetricsPrenatal diagnosisPregnancyAneuploidyRadiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key points What is already known about this topic? Through the introduction of the nuchal translucency scan at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks gestation for aneuploidy screening in the 1990s, the role of the first trimester scan has evolved to include an assessment of fetal anatomy. Advances in ultrasound technology and expertise now mean that many fetal anomalies that were previously detected on the routine second trimester anatomy scan are now detected in the first trimester. What does this study add? This report summarizes the oral debate that was presented at the 22nd International Conference on Prenatal Diagnosis and Therapy in Montreal, Canada, on 21 June 2022. Our maternal–fetal medicine experts argue for and against the proposition that a detailed review of fetal anatomy should be included in all scans performed at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks gestation.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.012

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrenatal DiagnosisSame topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207