MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143145613 · doi:10.1017/s0714980812000256

Older Adults Living with Osteoarthritis: Examining the Relationship of Age and Gender to Medicine Use

2012· article· fr· W2143145613 on OpenAlexafffund
Judith E. Fisher, Peri J. Ballantyne, Gillian Hawker

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoTrent UniversityDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineHumanitiesGynecologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RÉSUMÉ L’ostéoarthrite (OA) chez les personnes âgées constitue une condition chronique et répandue associée à des douleurs importantes d’invalidité. L’utilisation d’analgésiques par voie orale est un élément central de la gestion des symptômes. L’utilisation de médicaments par cette population, cependant, est complexe et la nécessité de contrôler les symptômes doivent être mis en balance avec les préoccupations concernant la sécurité des médicaments. Notre étude s’est concentrée à illustrer et à explorer les variations entre divers médicaments différents utilisés pour gérer les symptômes liés à l’ostéoarthrite. Nous avons analysé les données provenant d’un échantillon de personnes âgées de 55 ans et plus, qui vivent dans les communautés, et qui souffrent d’arthrite de la hanche ou du genou pour examiner les facteurs sociaux et médicaux associés à la variation dans les médicaments rapporté. Une conclusion principale est que les types de médicaments utilisés par les patients atteints d’ostéoarthrite varient selon l’âge et le sexe, indépendamment de la maladie et du contexte médical et social. Les explications possibles ont été considérés comme relatives aux préférences des patients et des professionnels.

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)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207