MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2204383210

The Canadian guidelines and the interdisciplinary clinical capacity of Canada to diagnose fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.

2011· article· en· W2204383210 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sterling K. Clarren, Jan Lutke, Michelle Sherbuck

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteNeuroDevNet
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderMedicineAction planFamily medicineMultidisciplinary approachMedical diagnosisConsistency (knowledge bases)Multidisciplinary teamMedical educationNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In 2005, the CMAJ published the Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder: Canadian guidelines for diagnosis. The intent of this publication was to encourage a more consistent interdisciplinary team approach and diagnostic procedure for FASD diagnoses. That same year, the Canada Northwest FASD Research Network (CanFASD Northwest) determined the locations and capacity for interdisciplinary FASD diagnosis across Canada. Six years later, we wondered how successfully these Guidelines had been in bringing consistency to FASD clinical work. METHOD: All clinical programs in Canada that routinely performed FASD evaluations were identified through membership in either our Network Action Team on FASD Diagnosis, professional meetings, organizational memberships, websites, programs lists available from Provincial or Federal offices or by word of mouth. Surveys were sent to all of the programs identified. RESULTS: A total of 55 clinics had been identified in seven provinces and one territory in 2005 that did FASD multidisciplinary diagnostics. In 2011 only 44 clinics were identified in six provinces and one territory using the same methodology. Survey responses were completed by 89% of these 44 clinics identified in 2011. The Guidelines were well known to all programs and actively referred to by most. Only 46% of respondents had a full staff of professionals on site for diagnosis, however 90% did use the team approach in determining final FASD diagnosis, while 79% used the team to help in developing a treatment plan. Among the clinics reporting, 74% of them used the new diagnostic schema proposed in the Guidelines and another 12% report using both the Guidelines and another system for diagnosis. INTERPRETATION: The Guidelines have become well known to the medical community. They have contributed to increased consistency in approach and in diagnosis. The variations in clinical ability to fully staff themselves, and the 20% decline in clinic numbers suggest important funding gaps. Many provinces and territories still have no local interdisciplinary programs for FASD diagnosis, and the need across Canada is still many times greater than what is currently available.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations40
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207