Screening, diagnosis, treatment and outcomes of developmental dysplasia of the hip in Brazilian population: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) includes a spectrum of clinical and imaging findings at birth or early infancy. The circumstances in which this condition is detected and managed may be heterogeneous in Brazil owing to its large territory and regional socio-economic differences. Mapping DDH perspectives in a country is fundamental for designing guidelines and strategies for public policy. This scoping review aims to map the available literature related to screening, diagnosis, treatment and outcomes of DDH in the Brazilian population to provide an overview of this condition and to describe regional variations in presentation and management across the country. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will follow the methods outlined in the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers manual for conducting a scoping review. Relevant publications will be first searched in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scientific Electronic Library Online, Web of Science, Scopus, "Biblioteca virtual em saúde" and "Biblioteca Digital Brasileira de Teses e Dissertações" using search terms developed from a brief preliminary search of those databases. There were no language or date range limitations for study inclusion. Databases will be searched from their inception until February 2024. Titles and abstracts will be analysed by two or more independent reviewers to assess them against the inclusion criteria for the review. The search results and study inclusion process will be reported in full in the final version of the scoping review and presented in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) flowchart. The resulting data will be recorded and organised to present the key information contained in all examined articles. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will include existing available studies and does not require a specific ethical review or approval. The final study will be submitted for presentation at conferences that focus on Brazilian healthcare and publication in peer-reviewed journals. This scoping review protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework. DOI registration (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/V3AYH).
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 | 0.070 | 0.066 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.007 |
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".