The epidemiology of self-reported fibromyalgia in Canada.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fibromyalgia (FM) is a poorly understood condition characterized by chronic diffuse musculoskeletal pain. This study describes the self-reported epidemiology of FM in Canada using data collected from the Canadian Community Health Survey, Cycle 1.1 (2000). FM prevalence rates with corresponding 95 percent confidence intervals were calculated. The Canadian prevalence rate was 1.1 percent with a female-to-male ratio of six to one. In women, rates increased with age up to 65 years, declining thereafter. Data collected on-age-at- diagnosis is presented and demonstrates a surprising number of newly diagnosed FM cases among people in their 20s and 30s, signifying that FM is a problem for people of all ages. The association with FM and a number of sub-populations was also investigated. With respect to geography and environment, the FM prevalence rate in women was shown to be approximately two percent in all Canadian regions except Quebec, where it was 1.1 percent. Further analysis by language suggested that geographical and cultural differences might best explain this observation. Finally, an association with a number of behavioral and socioeconomic determinants of health, including weight, is presented.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".