MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166522212 · doi:10.1093/brain/aws144

Young-onset amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: historical and other observations

2012· review· en· W2166522212 on OpenAlexaff
Martin R. Turner, John W. Barnwell, Ammar Al‐Chalabi, Andrew Eisen

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisAge of onsetPathologicalMedicinePediatricsPopulationPsychologyDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a wide range of age at initial symptom onset in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis despite a mean age of 65 years in population-based studies. 'Young-onset' amyotrophic lateral sclerosis typically refers to patients younger than ∼45 years and accounts for about 10% of cases in contemporary series. A review of published cases of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis from 1850 to 1950 revealed a far higher proportion of cases with young onset (>50%), with a steady decline to the contemporary figure. It is possible that this is not solely explained by increases in life expectancy. While there is still a rich variation in phenotypes among cases of young-onset amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, bulbar onset was found to be significantly under-represented in analysis of a large patient database, with implications for age-related vulnerabilities pertaining to focality of symptom onset. The timing of initiating pathological processes in relation to the emergence of symptoms is discussed, including the potential role of very early development and the interaction of epigenetic and environmental factors.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.269
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.096 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations83
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ResearchFrench-language works237,207