Prevalence of Cerebral Palsy in Quebec: Alternative Approaches
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To provide an estimate of the period prevalence of cerebral palsy (CP) in the province of Quebec. METHODS: Children with CP were identified from three consecutive birth cohorts (1999-2001) from the Quebec CP Registry, covering 6 of the 17 administrative health regions of the province. Two inferential approaches were applied for period prevalence estimation, frequentist and bayesian. RESULTS: 228 children were identified with CP. Using a frequentist approach, the overall prevalence of CP was 1.84 per 1,000 children aged 9-11 years living in those areas in 2010 (95% CI 1.60-2.08). Using a bayesian approach taking into account the uncertainty about the registry's sensitivity in capturing all cases, the overall prevalence is higher at 2.30 per 1,000 children with a 95% CI (1.99-2.65). CONCLUSION: Using a bayesian approach to adjust for the registry's known high specificity and lower sensitivity, the prevalence estimate is in concordance with worldwide estimates and estimates using administrative databases in western Canadian provinces. Future studies are needed to validate the diagnosis of CP within administrative databases and to evaluate possible regional trends across Canada in both prevalence and health service utilization, which may highlight disparities in healthcare delivery.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it