MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107328537 · doi:10.1177/1352458512446169

Sex ratio of multiple sclerosis in the National Swedish MS Register (SMSreg)

2012· article· en· W2107328537 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Inger Boström, Leszek Stawiarz, Anne‐Marie Landtblom

Bibliographic record

VenueMultiple Sclerosis Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSex ratioMultiple sclerosisDemographyMale to femaleMedicineDigit ratioFemale to maleRate ratioPopulationConfidence intervalEpidemiologyInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Sex ratio in multiple sclerosis has been reported from several geographical areas. The disease is more common in women. In Europe the female-to-male ratio varies from 1.1 to 3.4. A recent study from Canada has reported a significant increase, with time, in female-to-male ratio in multiple sclerosis over the last 100 years. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyse any change in sex ratio in multiple sclerosis in the Swedish population. METHODS: Data from the Swedish MS Register and data from the Swedish National Statistics Office were used to estimate sex ratio by year of birth and year of onset. RESULTS: In the analysis of sex ratio by year of birth there were 8834 patients (6271 women and 2563 men) born between 1931 and 1985. The mean women-to-men ratio was 2.62. No clear trend was noted for the women-to-men ratio by year of birth (Spearman's rho = 0.345, p = 0.298, n = 11). The number of patients analysed by year of onset was 9098 during the time period 1946 until 2005. The mean women-to-men ratio was 2.57. No significant change in women-to-men ratio (Spearman's rho = -0.007, p = 0.983, n = 12) with time was observed. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence for an increasing women-to-men ratio with time amongst Swedish multiple sclerosis 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.243
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.077 · 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.

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

Citations66
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultiple Sclerosis JournalSame topicDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesFrench-language works237,207