MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2183077220

Spatio-temporal distribution of hypothyroidism in Quebec.

2006· article· en· W2183077220 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fabien Gagnon, Marie‐France Langlois, Isabelle Michaud, Suzanne Gingras, Jean-François Duchesne, Benoît Lévesque

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Health and Social Inequalities
Canadian institutionsThe Quebec Population Health Research NetworkCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)DemographyDistribution (mathematics)Gerontology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study estimates the incidence and prevalence of hypothyroidism in Quebec, based on a data bank produced by the Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ) on the use of thyroid hormones by persons insured under RAMQ's public drug insurance plan between 1992 and 2001. In 2001, the prevalence of thyroid hormone use in women and men respectively was 10.8 and 2.9 percent. Prevalence increases with age, reaching, among those aged 65 and over, 21.9 percent in women and 8.0 percent in men in 2001. Incidence is highest in women between the ages of 45 and 64 and in men aged 65 and over. Age-related incidence is relatively stable in women but tends to increase in men. On a regional and local basis (by Centre local de services communautaires [CLSC]), incidence rates up to 2.4 times higher than anticipated on the basis of provincial incidence rates were observed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPublic Health and Social InequalitiesFrench-language works237,207