MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W165424471 · doi:10.1155/2007/943460

Fourteen-Year Study of Hospital Admissions for Diverticular Disease in Ontario

2007· article· en· W165424471 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Eiran Warner, Eric Crighton, Rahim Moineddin, Muhammad Mamdani, Ross Upshur

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverticular Disease and Complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDiverticular diseaseMedicineIncidence (geometry)EpidemiologyPopulationRetrospective cohort studyDiseaseCohort studyCohortPediatricsDemographyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diverticular disease is one of the most common gastrointestinal conditions affecting the Canadian population, yet very little is known about its epidemiology. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to measure the rate of hospital admission for diverticular disease by age and sex over a 14-year period in the population of Ontario. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The present study was a retrospective, population-based cohort study of all hospital admissions for diverticular disease from 1988 to 2002. RESULTS: There were 133,875 hospital admissions during the period. Admission rates increased with age, and women were admitted at higher rates than men across all age groups. CONCLUSION: Diverticular disease is an important cause of gastrointestinal morbidity. As the population ages, a rise in the incidence of diverticular disease can be anticipated. Future studies to explain sex difference in admissions are required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations148
Published2007
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of GastroenterologySame topicDiverticular Disease and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207