MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405184829 · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1011484

Cell-free placental DNA: What do we really know?

2024· review· en· W4405184829 on OpenAlexaff
Natalie Yuen, Melanie Lemaire, Samantha L. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Genetics · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyLimitingCell-free fetal DNAPlacentaGestationComputational biologyBioinformaticsPregnancyPrenatal diagnosisFetusGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cell-free placental DNA (cfpDNA) is present in maternal circulation during gestation. CfpDNA carries great potential as a research and clinical tool as it provides a means to investigate the placental (epi)genome across gestation, which previously required invasive placenta sampling procedures. CfpDNA has been widely implemented in the clinical setting for noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT). Despite this, the basic biology of cfpDNA remains poorly understood, limiting the research and clinical utility of cfpDNA. This review will examine the current knowledge of cfpDNA, including origins and molecular characteristics, highlight gaps in knowledge, and discuss future research directions.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.268 · 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.

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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS GeneticsSame topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207