MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117414868 · doi:10.2196/resprot.2209

The Natural History of Spina Bifida in Children Pilot Project: Research Protocol

2013· article· en· W2117414868 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ann I. Alriksson‐Schmidt, Judy Thibadeau, Mark E. Swanson, David Marcus, Kari L Carris, Csaba Siffel, Elisabeth Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Dysraphism and Malformations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsSpina bifidaPopulationMedicineFamily medicineHealth carePediatricsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Population-based empirical information to inform health care professionals working with children with spina bifida currently is lacking. Spina bifida is a highly complex condition that not only affects mobility but many additional aspects of life. We have developed a pilot project that focuses on a broad range of domains: surgeries, development and learning, nutrition and physical growth, mobility and functioning, general health, and family demographics. Specifically, we will: (1) explore the feasibility of identifying and recruiting participants using different recruitment sources, (2) test a multidisciplinary module to collect the data, (3) determine the utility of different methods of retrieving the data, and (4) summarize descriptive information on living with spina bifida. OBJECTIVE: The overall objective of the project was to provide information for a future multistate prospective study on the natural history of spina bifida. METHODS: Families with a child 3 to 6 years of age with a diagnosis of spina bifida were eligible for enrollment. Eligible families were identified through a US population-based tracking system for birth defects and from a local spina bifida clinic. RESULTS: This is an ongoing project with first results expected in 2013. CONCLUSIONS: This project, and the planned multistate follow-up project, will provide information both to health care professionals experienced in providing care to patients with spina bifida, and to those who have yet to work with this population. The long-term purpose of this project is to increase the knowledge about growing up with spina bifida and to guide health care practices by prospectively studying a cohort of children born with this condition.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.008

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicSpinal Dysraphism and MalformationsFrench-language works237,207