MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968571773 · doi:10.1093/brain/123.3.641

The natural history of multiple sclerosis: a geographically based study: 8: Familial multiple sclerosis

2000· article· en· W1968571773 on OpenAlexaffabout
George C. Ebers

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersMultiple Sclerosis Society
KeywordsMultiple sclerosisDemographicsMedicineEpidemiologyFirst-degree relativesNatural historyDemographyPopulationCohortFamily historyFamily aggregationInternal medicinePediatricsDiseasePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have examined the demographics and long-term outcome of 1044 patients with sporadic and familial multiple sclerosis in a population-based cohort from London, Ontario. The mean follow-up was 25 years in duration, and by this time most patients had reached the unambiguous endpoint scores of the Kurtzke disability status scale (DSS), DSS 6, 8 or 10. An affected family member was identified in 19.8% of the total population, and this subgroup was further divided arbitrarily into the following three groups by the type and number of relatives affected: (i) first degree only; (ii) first degree plus others; (iii) second or third degree. The outcome in these groups was compared with that for those patients who, at a mean 25 year follow-up, had no relatives known to be affected. Familial cases closely resembled those remaining sporadic in both demographics and outcome, although onset in the most heavily loaded families was earlier and male/female ratio was greater. The times to DSS 6, 8 and 10 did not differ significantly when sporadic, familial and familial subgroups were compared. These results provide no clinical support for viewing familial multiple sclerosis as distinct from the sporadic form. The observed recurrence rate for siblings in a strictly defined epidemiological sample was 3.5%, much as projected. These results validate the recurrence risks which have previously been derived from age-corrected data for these first-degree relatives.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations135
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207