ALS Incidence in Nova Scotia Over a 20- Year-Period: A Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have suggested that the incidence of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) in Nova Scotia is relatively high and increasing over time. This study was performed to determine the current incidence of ALS in Nova Scotia and to compare this to data collected in 1984 and 1995. METHODS: All physiatrists and neurologists were surveyed on a monthly basis over one year to record all new cases of ALS diagnosed in Nova Scotia. Data was compared to that collected using similar methods in 1984 and 1995. To validate our methods, we also performed a retrospective study using a provincial health care database. RESULTS: There were 21 new ALS cases in Nova Scotia during the 2003 study period, yielding a crude incidence of 2.24/100,000. The age-adjusted incident rate for 2003 was 2.13 (95% CI = 0.11-4.15). The age-adjusted rate for 1995 was 2.3 (95% CI = 0.08-4.53) while the age-adjusted rate for 1984 was 2.22 (95% CI = 0.13-4.32). Analysis of provincial health records identified 24 cases of ALS and an age-adjusted incidence of 2.44/100,000. CONCLUSIONS: The age-adjusted incidence of ALS in Nova Scotia has remained stable over the period 1984-2003. The incidence is similar to that reported in several other parts of the world.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".