MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136846989 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e31820e7be6

Motor vehicle crashes, suicides, and assaults

2011· letter· en· W2136846989 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joseph F. Drazkowski, Joseph I Sirven

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2011
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyMedicineInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthPopulationPoison controlSuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsCohortNeurologyPublic healthRetrospective cohort studyPsychiatryQuality of life (healthcare)Family medicineMedical emergencyEnvironmental healthNursingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many practices likely follow persons with epilepsy (PWE), of whom the majority enjoys good seizure control. For those whose epilepsy is resistant to treatment, there are many safety concerns. Most practicing neurologists will routinely advise patients about the driving regulations in their state, and about other activities that could be associated with risk if a seizure occurred, such as working at heights, operating machinery, or swimming. For many, restrictions in activity are a major contributor toward reduced quality of life. But how risky are these activities? In this issue of Neurology ®, Kwon and colleagues1 at the University of Calgary present us with a new look into critical personal dangers associated with having epilepsy. This large retrospective population-based study included more than 51,000 individuals in a single province in Canada utilizing the Public health Registry for the Alberta Health Services Calgary Zone. The investigators compared patients with epilepsy to age-matched controls with a 1:4 ratio. The cohort constituted 97% of the population, captured in both urban and rural settings. Three …

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0090.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207