MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161616892 · doi:10.1136/adc.2008.144527

Incidence and clinical features of Langerhans cell histiocytosis in the UK and Ireland

2008· article· en· W2161616892 on OpenAlexaff
Jane A Salotti, Vasanta Nanduri, Mark S. Pearce, Louise Parker, Richard Lynn, Kevin Windebank

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Disease in Childhood · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHistiocytic Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)EpidemiologyPediatricsLangerhans cell histiocytosisHistiocytosisCancer registryDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: There are few published studies on the epidemiology of Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH). We undertook a survey to ascertain all newly diagnosed cases aged 0-16 years in the UK and Republic of Ireland. DESIGN: Three methods of ascertainment were used: the British Paediatric Surveillance Unit (BPSU) system, a survey by Newcastle University, and the Children's Cancer and Leukaemia Group (CCLG) registry. Deaths data were obtained from the UK Office for National Statistics and the Central Statistics Office in Ireland. Clinicians who reported cases were sent a questionnaire to obtain demographic and clinical details. RESULTS: Over the 2-year period, 94 cases were identified. The age-standardised incidence rate of LCH in children aged 0-14 years was 4.1 per million per year. The sex ratio (M:F) was 1.5:1 and the median age at diagnosis was 5.9 years. Single system disease (predominantly bony involvement) accounted for 73% of cases and 27% had multisystem disease of whom 7% had involvement of "risk organs" (liver, lung, spleen and bone marrow). Three children died, two of whom were diagnosed after death. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study of LCH to use an active surveillance method with additional sources of ascertainment. Our incidence is comparable with those in other national reports, although it is likely to be an underestimate as each method may have missed some cases, either diagnosed or undiagnosed.

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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations207
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Disease in ChildhoodSame topicHistiocytic Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207