Chiropractic Patients in Denmark 2002: An Expanded Description and Comparison With 1999 Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to provide an expanded description of Danish chiropractic patients and to compare characteristics seen in a survey from 1999 with those seen in 2002. METHODS: All chiropractic clinics in Denmark were asked to collect information on new patients during 1 randomly assigned week in 2002 using a survey questionnaire. All 52 weeks of the year 2002 were represented with an even dispersion of weeks (182 clinics participated). Outcome measures included age, sex, education, occupation, location and duration of chief complaint, pain intensity, limitation of activities of daily living, mode of referral, duration of sick leave, previous treatments, comorbidity, SF-12, smoking habits, and use of x-ray. RESULTS: Eighty-five percent of all chiropractic clinics in Denmark participated in the study, and 1595 patients (81%) filled out a self-administered questionnaire. As in 1999, the most frequent area of complaint was pain related to the lower back and pelvis (49%). Contrary to the 1999 survey, most of the patients (64%) had complaints of less than 4 weeks of duration. Twenty-nine percent of the patients had been off work because of their symptoms; most of these for less than 1 week. Fifty-one percent of all patients were referred to chiropractors in 2002 (doubling since 1999). Referrals from general medical practitioners rose from 11% in 1999 to 17% in 2002. Sixty percent of all patients had similar symptoms in the past, and approximately half had previously received treatment of the same or a similar problem. Thirty percent of first-time chiropractic patients were x-rayed. Compared with general population measures, Danish chiropractic patients had significantly worse physical health status measured by the SF-12. CONCLUSIONS: Most Danish chiropractic patients complain of pain related to the spine, especially the lower back, with duration of symptoms of less than 4 weeks, and many with recurrent back pain. Referrals from general medical practitioners have increased since 1999.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".