MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053815964 · doi:10.1002/mds.21272

Is there seasonal variation in risk of Parkinson's disease?

2007· article· en· W2053815964 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ronald B. Postuma, Christina Wolfson, Ali H. Rajput, A. Jon Stoessl, W. R. Wayne Martin, Oksana Suchowersky, Sylvain Chouinard, Michel Panisset, Mandar Jog, David A. Grimes, Connie Marras, Anthony E. Lang

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNuclear Receptors and Signaling
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalOttawa HospitalUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicDemographyIncidence (geometry)MedicineSeasonalityPopulationPediatricsDiseaseSubspecialtyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Infectious disease (medical specialty)BiologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicinePsychiatryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies suggest that, for many adult-onset neurological diseases, persons born at a certain time of year are at higher risk of the disease. Small-scale studies have suggested that persons born in the spring may be at higher risk of developing Parkinson's disease (PD) late in life. There have also been suggestions that there are clusters of PD birth dates in the years of major influenza pandemics. To determine whether there is any seasonal variation in the birth dates of PD patients, we examined birth dates of 8,168 PD patients collected from subspecialty movement disorder clinics across Canada. Patterns of seasonality of birth were examined and compared with the general Canadian population. In addition, we compared counts of patients born in the years of major influenza pandemics with the number born in the surrounding years. We found no evidence of systematic seasonal variation in PD incidence by birth date, or of clustering of birth dates during influenza pandemic years in PD patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement DisordersSame topicNuclear Receptors and SignalingFrench-language works237,207