MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000975299 · doi:10.1159/000182549

Comparison of Epidemiological Data on Congenital Hypothyroidism in Europe with Those of Other Parts in the World

2008· article· en· W2000975299 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jean‐Edmond Toublanc

Bibliographic record

VenueHormone Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncidence (geometry)DemographyEpidemiologyGeographyEthnic groupMedicinePolitical scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The actual worldwide incidence of congenital hypothyroidism (CH) is based on the results of screening in parts of the world where screening is mandatory, i.e. most of Europe, USA, Canada, Cuba, Australia, New Zealand and Japan. In other parts of the world, some indications are given by the results of pilot studies. In Europe, mean overall incidence (1985-1990) for the countries included in our inquiry is 1/3801--in each country for the same period: Austria 1/3,930, Belgium 1/3,750, Czechoslovakia 1/6,037, Denmark 1/3,777, Finland 1/3,969, France 1/4,132, FRG 1/3,827, Greece 1/3,314, Hungary 1/5,632, Israel 1/3,152, Italy 1/3,150, The Netherlands 1/3,723, Norway 1/3,069, Portugal 1/3,139, Spain 1/3,216, Switzerland 1/3,913, UK 1/3,398 and Turkey (pilot study 1989-1992) 1/2,943. In comparison, the figures for the USA for the whole country are similar for the mean overall incidence (1988-1990): 1/4,119. But large variations exist between the states, the reasons of which are perhaps related either to technical problems or to the ethnic background in each state. In Canada and Japan, modifications of screening procedures have led to similar figures for the last years in our possess, Canada (1986-1988) 1/3,884 and Japan (1990) 1/3,856. The figures (mean overall incidence) for Cuba (1987-1991) 1/2,325, for Australia (1985-1990) 1/1/3,331 and for New Zealand (1987-1990) 1/4,496 are quite comparable. So in these countries where the screening is established, no great variations are noted as in certain parts of the world with pilot studies: Argentine (Buenos Aires; 1985-1990) 1/4,407, Chile (1991-1992) 1/2,514, Brazil (Porto Alegre; 1987-1991) 1/4,429.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

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)0.005
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.411
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.070 · 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

Citations156
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHormone ResearchSame topicThyroid Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207