MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411583366 · doi:10.1159/000546993

Enhanced Recovery after Fetal Sequencing: A Perinatal Genomic Scoping Review of Exome/Genome Testing for Reproductive/Obstetric-MFM Providers to Initiate Knowledge Translation following a Screening Ultrasound Identifying Fetal Anomalies

2025· review· en· W4411583366 on OpenAlexaff
R. Douglas Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueFetal Diagnosis and Therapy · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineExome sequencingObstetricsFetusExomeGenetic testingPrenatal diagnosisPregnancyBioinformaticsComputational biologyGeneticsBiologyMutationGeneInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This review of genomic perinatal opportunities and uses will provide counseling and personal genetic knowledge for improved patient care. SUMMARY: This focused systematic analysis and review has used PubMed keywords to identify genomic testing for ultrasound-identified fetal anomaly(ies) that require diagnostic testing after an informed consent process. Multiple fetal anomalies, using TRIO sequencing processes, have a better diagnostic yield, with certain cohorts >50%. For the single anatomic categories, skeletal system, central nervous system, and renal system, using WES fetal sequencing (most commonly) for a diagnostic result, have the larger incremental diagnostic yield over the chromosome micro-array. KEY MESSAGES: The phenotype-genotype (fetal-genomic result) consideration and use of the prenatal exome sequencing technology can be summarized using a SWOT analysis: strength (enhanced evaluation of fetal-neonatal genomic abnormalities not identified by standard chromosomal microarray and improved ethical care decisions); weakness (the understanding and complexity of genomic pathology and testing/the fiscal cost for professional time and the health system services); opportunity (an increased recognition of fetal genetic risk pathology [de novo or inherited carrier mutations] with improved understanding and knowledge translation of counseling for recurrence risk); threat (inability to provide a genetic diagnosis or interpret a variant of unknown significance or the discovery of incidental findings or unanticipated parental genomic diagnoses).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFetal Diagnosis and TherapySame topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207