Meeting Review: The management of multiple sclerosis in children: a European view
Bibliographic record
Abstract
About 3-5% of all patients with multiple sclerosis experience the onset of their disease under the age of 16. A significant proportion of paediatric multiple sclerosis patients develop significant cognitive disturbances and persistent physical disability. The high relapse rate and the morbidity in the paediatric multiple sclerosis population has triggered the use of disease-modifying therapies that have been shown to reduce relapse rate, disease progression and cognitive decline in adult patients with multiple sclerosis. Hard evidence for the right treatment and its appropriate timing is scarce in paediatric multiple sclerosis. Nevertheless, expertise in this field has grown thanks to recent open-label trials and experience generated in specialized centres. In spring 2009, a first meeting was held in Rotterdam with clinicians from 11 European countries (one from Canada) that are all active in the management of paediatric multiple sclerosis. One of the aims was to generate a common view on the management of paediatric multiple sclerosis patients. The result of this meeting is presented here to help standardize treatment and to support clinicians with less experience in this field.
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 | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
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".