MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403565152 · doi:10.1002/pd.6689

Contemporary Outcomes of a National Fetal Spina Bifida Surgery Service

2024· article· en· W4403565152 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Charlotte C. Kik, Yada Kunpalin, Abhaya V. Kulkarni, Nimrah Abbasi, Greg Ryan, Philip DeKoninck, Paige Church, Armaan K. Malhotra, Kamini Raghuram, Edmond Kelly, Tim Van Mieghem

Bibliographic record

VenuePrenatal Diagnosis · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Dysraphism and Malformations
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalCentre for Social InnovationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationMount Sinai Hospital
FundersSophia FoundationUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsSpina bifidaMedicineFetal surgeryHydrocephalusFetusGross motor skillPediatricsPhysical therapySurgeryMotor skillPregnancyIn utero

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess contemporary outcomes of fetuses who underwent open fetal spina bifida surgery in Canada. METHODS: Our clinical program prospectively collected outcomes of all consecutive fetuses who underwent open fetal spina bifida closure at the Ontario Fetal Center in Toronto and who were at least 1 year of age at the time of postnatal follow-up. We gathered information on the need for hydrocephalus treatment, motor function, bladder function, as well as neurodevelopment (Ages and Stages Questionnaire and Bayley's scales of infant development). Developmental outcomes were categorized as "Typical Development," "Possible Delay," or "Significantly Delayed." RESULTS: Between 2017 and 2022, 41 fetuses underwent open fetal spina bifida closure. Twenty-four patients (58.5%) responded to the questionnaire at a median age of 46.5 months. Eight children (33.3%) required CSF diversion procedures. Bladder management included clean intermittent catheterization (43.5%), spontaneous voiding (34.8%), or both (21.7%), with 43.5% needing medication for overactive bladder. All patients could sit independently, with 50% walking outside and 50% crawling indoors. Among those walking outdoors (50%), 25% did so without orthotics or aid, 58.3% with orthotics, and 16.7% required additional walking aids. Most children demonstrated typical communication and problem-solving skills (79.2%), while gross motor development was significantly delayed in 91.7% of cases. Fine motor skills varied, with 56.5% showing typical development and 34.8% possibly experiencing delays. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed a mixed developmental profile among patients who underwent open fetal spina bifida repair, consistent with the MOMs trial findings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrenatal DiagnosisSame topicSpinal Dysraphism and MalformationsFrench-language works237,207