MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149681150 · doi:10.1177/1352458512462918

The epidemiology of multiple sclerosis in Latin America and the Caribbean: a systematic review

2012· review· en· W2149681150 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMultiple Sclerosis Journal · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsNovartis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpidemiologyLatin AmericansMultiple sclerosisIncidence (geometry)EtiologyMedicineDemographyPediatricsGeographyPathologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The incidence and prevalence of multiple sclerosis (MS) varies geographically as shown through extensive epidemiological studies performed mainly in developed countries. Nonetheless, scant data is available in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). The objective of this review is to assess epidemiological data of MS in LAC. We conducted a systematic review of published articles and gray literature from January 1995 to May 2011. Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria after full-text review. Incidence data were found in only three studies and ranged from 0.3 to 1.9 annual cases per 100,000 person-years. Prevalence was reported in 10 studies and ranged from 0.83 to 21.5 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. The most prevalent subtype of MS was the relapsing-remitting form (48% to 91% of the series). No data about mortality were found. This study showed low frequency for MS in LAC compared with North American and European countries. The role of environmental and genetic factors should be well studied, providing new insights about its etiology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.300
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.078 · 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