MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2183697674

Prevalence of migraine in the Canadian household population.

2014· article· en· W2183697674 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pamela L Ramage-Morin, Heather Gilmour

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMigraineMedicineNova scotiaMedical prescriptionDepression (economics)PopulationDemographyEpidemiologyPsychiatryEnvironmental healthGeographyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on data from the 2010 and 2011 Canadian Community Health Surveys and the 2011 Survey of Living with Neurological Conditions in Canada, this article provides information about migraine among people living in private households. In 2010/2011, an estimated 8.3% of Canadians (2.7 million) reported that they had been diagnosed with migraine by a health professional. Females were more likely than males to report migraine: 11.8% versus 4.7%. Migraine prevalence was highest among people in their 30s and 40s: 17.0% for women and 6.5% for men. Compared with the national figure, the prevalence of migraine was lower in Quebec (6.8%) and higher in Manitoba (9.5%), Nova Scotia (9.1%) and Ontario (8.8%). Among people who reported a migraine diagnosis, 42% took prescription medication for their condition, and 56% incurred medication-related out-of-pocket expenses. Migraine was highly comorbid with depression and affected many aspects of daily life including education, work, sleep, and driving.

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)0.002
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 score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations65
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207