MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

School attendance in children with Type 1 diabetes

2005· article· en· W1966915319 on OpenAlexafffundabout
L. A. Glaab, Brown Re, Denis Daneman

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetic Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Substance Use and School Attendance
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersEli Lilly CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineAbsenteeismAttendanceDiabetes mellitusEl NiñoType 1 diabetesPediatricsDemographyFamily medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To determine whether children with Type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) miss more school than their non-DM siblings and peers and to identify factors associated with school absenteeism in children with DM. METHODS: School absenteeism data for the 2000-01 school year were obtained for 78 children with DM, 38 non-DM siblings and 118,269 age-matched peers in Toronto, Ontario. Questionnaires and hospital records were utilized to evaluate child-, family- and diabetes-related factors associated with school absenteeism in children with DM. RESULTS: Children with DM missed only slightly, albeit significantly more school than both their non-DM siblings (mean +/-sd: 10.9 +/- 8.9 vs. 8.1 +/- 8.1 days, P < 0.001) and peers (median: 8.8 vs. 5.5 days, P = 0.0005). A multiple regression analysis indicated that school absenteeism in children with DM was associated with their parents' attitudes towards school attendance (P = 0.002), poorer metabolic control (P = 0.006), shorter disease duration (P = 0.006) and a lack of aggressive behaviour (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: With current management strategies, near normal school attendance is a reasonable goal for all children with DM and should be strongly encouraged by parents, educators and health care professionals.

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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations52
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetic MedicineSame topicYouth Substance Use and School AttendanceFrench-language works237,207