MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385230554 · doi:10.3390/ijns9030040

Identifying Clinical Criteria for an Expanded Targeted Approach to Screening for Congenital Cytomegalovirus Infection—A Retrospective Study

2023· article· en· W4385230554 on OpenAlexaff
Maya Heled Akiva, Hannah Hyde-De Sousa, Valérie Lamarre, Isabelle Boucoiran, Soren Gantt, Christian Renaud, Fatima Kakkar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Neonatal Screening · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCytomegalovirusPediatricsNewborn screeningRetrospective cohort studyPregnancyMicrocephalyCytomegalovirus infectionHearing lossHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Viral diseaseImmunologyInternal medicineHerpesviridaeHuman cytomegalovirusVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Targeted screening for congenital CMV infection (cCMV), which entails CMV testing of infants who fail newborn hearing screening (NBHS), has become common practice. However, this strategy misses nearly all infected infants with normal hearing at birth who are nonetheless at high risk of subsequent hearing loss and would benefit from timely cCMV diagnosis. The objective of this study was to identify expanded criteria predictive of cCMV to increase the scope and utility of targeted newborn CMV screening. In this retrospective study, 465 newborns were tested for cCMV at a single tertiary care center with a targeted screening program between 2014 and 2018. Twenty-two infants were diagnosed with cCMV, representing 0.2% of the 12,189 births over this period and 4.7% of the infants tested. The highest prevalence of cCMV infection was among infants tested because of primary maternal CMV infection (8/42, 19%), followed by failed initial NBHS (10/88, 11.4%), maternal HIV infection (3/137, 2.2%), and clinical suspicion alone (5/232, 2.2%). The symptoms with the highest prevalence of infection among all infants tested included an enlarged liver and/or spleen (33.3%) (3/9), followed by petechiae (33.3%), microcephaly (9.4%), direct hyperbilirubinemia (7.7%), thrombocytopenia (6%), and growth impairment (4.3%). In addition to CMV screening of newborns who fail the NBHS, these data suggest that certain clinical signs of cCMV-in particular: thrombocytopenia, growth impairment, and HIV exposure in pregnancy-should be additional criteria for expanded targeted newborn CMV screening, where universal screening is not yet the standard of care.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.273 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Neonatal ScreeningSame topicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus researchFrench-language works237,207