MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977376025 · doi:10.1108/13595474200500035

Screening Adults with Down's Syndrome for Early Signs of Alzheimer's Disease

2005· article· en· W1977376025 on OpenAlexaff
Judith McBrien, Sarah Whitwham, Karen Olverman, Stuart J. Masters

Bibliographic record

VenueTizard Learning Disability Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDown syndrome and intellectual disability research
Canadian institutionsLearning Partnership
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLearning disabilityPsychologySet (abstract data type)Down syndromeDiseaseService (business)Intellectual disabilityChallenging behaviourGerontologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the now well‐recognised risk of Alzheimer's Disease (AD) for adults with Down's Syndrome (DS) as they reach middle age, services for people with learning disability (LD) need to meet this new challenge. Good practice guidance from the Foundation for People with Learning Disabilities (Turk et al, 2001) recommended that every service for people with learning disability should set up a register of adults with DS, conduct a baseline assessment of cognitive and adaptive functioning before the age of 30 years, develop specialist skills in this area, offer training to other professionals, front‐line staff and carers, and seek high‐quality co‐ordination between agencies. This article reports the progress of one LD service in meeting these challenges, highlighting the successes and difficulties that may guide other teams considering such a development.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTizard Learning Disability ReviewSame topicDown syndrome and intellectual disability researchFrench-language works237,207