Canadian multicentre osteoporosis study (CaMos)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos) is a five-year prospective study of the skeletal health of a randomly selected population of women and men ≥ 25 years from nine centres across Canada. It will assess the relationship between low-trauma fractures and various characteristics of bone including Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) and risk factors. The immediate objectives are to determine the dimensions of osteoporosis and fracture in Canada and to determine the environmental risk factors for these diseases. The long-term objectives are to develop methods for the accurate detection of those at increased risk to fracture and to develop strategies for fracture prevention. The study started in Jan. 1996 and subject recruitment was complete by Sept. 1997. Canadian reference standards for DEXA have been established and with these the prevalence of osteoporosis, as defined by WHO, was estimated. Approximately 15% of women and 5% of men over age 50 years have osteoporosis and 55% of women and 35% of men have osteopenia. From spine x-rays it was found that >25% of Canadian women and men over age 50 years have verebral deformities. The five year follow-up of all CaMos subjects will begin July 2000 and is scheduled to be completed in Sept. 2002. Analysis of the baseline and annual follow-up data is currently underway. There is every indication from the results to date that our short and long-term objectives will be met. Drug Dev. Res. 49:201–205, 2000. © 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".