Genetic Role in Recurrence of Idiopathic CTEV: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: deformities. Clubfoot affects 1 in every 1000 infants born worldwide, with various incidences according to geographical areas. It has been previously hypothesized that the possible genetic role in Idiopathic CTEV (ICTEV) might have a treatment-resistant phenotype. However, the genetic involvement in recurrent ICTEV cases is yet to be determined. Aim: To systematically review existing literature regarding the discovery of genetic involvement in recurrent ICTEV to date to further understand the etiology of relapse. Methods: A comprehensive search was performed on medical databases, and the review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed on several medical databases: PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and European PMC on May 10, 2022. We included studies reporting patients with recurring idiopathic CTEV or CTEV of unknown cause after treatment, reporting whole-genetic sequencing, whole-exome sequencing, Polymerase Chain Reaction, or Western blot analysis as methods of genetic analysis (intervention) and providing results of idiopathic CTEV genetic involvement. Non-English studies, literature reviews, and irrelevant articles were excluded. Quality and risk of bias assessments were performed using Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for non-randomized studies where appropriate. The authors discussed data extracted with the primary outcome of gene(s) frequency being reported of their involvement in recurrent ICTEV cases. Results: Three pieces of literature were included in this review. Two studies analyzed the genetic involvement in CTEV occurrence, while one analyzed the protein types found. Discussion: With included studies of less than five, we could not perform other forms of analysis apart from qualitatively. Conclusion: The rarity of literature exploring the genetic etiology of recurrent ICTEV cases has been reflected in this systematic review, giving opportunities for future research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".