MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055950180 · doi:10.1159/000059524

The Maracaibo Aging Study: Population and Methodological Issues

2002· article· en· W2055950180 on OpenAlexaff
Gladys E. Maestre, Gloria Pino‐Ramírez, Aldrín E. Molero, Eglé R. Silva, Raquel Zambrano, Luis Falque, María P. Gamero, Tulio Sulbarán

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroepidemiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAging, Health, and Disability
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
FundersConsejo Nacional para Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas
KeywordsMedicineGerontologyMultidisciplinary approachPopulationEpidemiologyNeuropsychologyDemographyEnvironmental healthPsychiatryCognitionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Maracaibo Aging Study is a longitudinal, population-based, one-step multidisciplinary study of age-related diseases, with a particular focus on memory-related disorders, among subjects over 55 years living in a neighborhood of the city of Maracaibo, Venezuela. Three phases were scheduled for this study. First, a door-to-door survey was conducted in order to build a registry and to obtain general and sociodemographic characteristics. During the second phase, information regarding changes in the abilities of the subjects was collected. The third phase consisted of a full neuropsychiatric examination, cardiovascular evaluation, nutritional assessment, neuropsychological testing, routine laboratory tests and genetic analysis. 3,657 subjects were surveyed between January and August, 1998. There were more women than men, and the average number of years of formal education was low, particularly among women. The limitations and strengths of the study are discussed.

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)0.211
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.285
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2110.285
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.011
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.215 · 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.

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

Citations61
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroepidemiologySame topicAging, Health, and DisabilityFrench-language works237,207