The Epidemiology of Cleft Lip and Palate in Canada, 1998 to 2007
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the birth prevalence, gender distribution, and pattern of surgical intervention for clefts in Canada (1998 to 2007). Also to highlight the difficulties associated with studying the epidemiology of clefts using the current data collection mechanisms. METHODS: Epidemiologic data acquired from the Canadian Institute for Health Information. SETTING: Population-based study in Canada 1998 to 2007. PATIENTS: All live births with an International Classification of Diseases (9th or 10th revision) diagnostic code for cleft palate or for cleft lip with or without cleft palate or with a surgical intervention code for repair of cleft lip or cleft palate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Birth prevalence, gender distribution, and pattern of surgical intervention. RESULTS: There were 3,015,325 live births in Canada (1998 to 2007). The mean birth prevalence was 0.82 per 1000 live births for cleft lip with or without cleft palate and 0.58 per 1000 live births for cleft palate. The birth prevalence of cleft lip with or without cleft palate was significantly higher in boys, with a stable boy to girl ratio of 1.75:1. Cleft palate was significantly greater in girls; however, the boy to girl ratio decreased from 0.97:1 in 1998 to 0.59:1 in 2007. The median age of repair in Canada from 1998 to 2007 was 4.7 months for cleft lip and 11.6 months for cleft palate. Thirty percent of patients underwent cleft palate repair after age 1. CONCLUSION: The birth prevalence of cleft palate and cleft lip with or without cleft palate is stable in Canada. An increasing birth prevalence of cleft palate in girls is suggested. The timing of surgical intervention is consistent with current standards. The challenges associated with collecting these data in Canada are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".