Regional variation of multiple sclerosis prevalence in Canada
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
OBJECTIVE: To describe the regional distribution of multiple sclerosis (MS) prevalence in Canada, controlling for age and sex. METHODS: This study used data from the Canadian Community Health Survey, a large general health survey (n = 131,535) conducted in 2000/2001. Subjects aged 18 and over were included in the current analysis (n = 116,109). The presence of MS was determined by self-report. Prevalence was computed in five regions (Atlantic, Quebec, Ontario, Prairies and British Columbia). Logistic regression was used to compare regions and examine for confounding/interaction by age and sex. RESULTS: The overall Canadian MS prevalence was 240 per 100000 (95%CI: 210 280). Prevalence ranged from 180 (95%CI: 90-260) in Quebec to 350 (95%CI: 230-470) in Atlantic Canada. Logistic regression revealed no statistical difference between the odds of MS in Quebec, Ontario and British Columbia adjusted for age and sex. The adjusted odds of MS in the Prairies and Atlantic regions were significantly higher than in the other regions combined, with odds ratios of 1.7 (95%CI: 1.1-2.4, P <0.01) and 1.6 (95%CI: 1.1-2.4, P <0.05) respectively. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated similar prevalence in the nonaboriginal/nonimmigrant group (n = 96219). CONCLUSION: Results suggest that Canadian MS prevalence differs by region. If validated, these regional differences may facilitate investigation of environmental influences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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