Surveillance for Progressive Intellectual and Neurological Deterioration in the Canadian Paediatric Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To conduct active surveillance of the Canadian paediatric population for children who have a progressive intellectual and neurological deterioration to detect the occurrence of cases of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease or variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. CASE DEFINITION: Any child who is less than or equal to 18 years of age, who had a progressive loss of already attained intellectual/developmental abilities and development of abnormal neurological signs of greater than three months duration was eligible for inclusion. DURATION: July 1999 to July 2001. METHOD: Enhanced active surveillance system for progressive intellectual and neurological deterioration was implemented to detect, prospectively, among the Canadian paediatric population. Each month, all paediatricians and paediatric neurologists in Canada were mailed a reporting form. All reported cases were reviewed by the principal investigator who classified the cases into one of four predetermined categories. Cases where there was evidence of neurological and intellectual regression without known cause were reviewed by a panel. Reported cases were reviewed for the possibility of classic or variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. RESULTS: Over 2200 physicians took part in this program. There was more than an 80% monthly return rate of the initial report form. Ninety-nine possible cases of progressive neurological and intellectual deterioration were reported. Sixty cases were classified as having a progressive neurological syndrome associated with intellectual deterioration. Fourteen cases were duplicates. One case of Creutzfeldt-Jacob disorder was found but no cases of the variant form of Creutzfeldt-Jacob disorder. Fifteen cases were felt not to meet the above-mentioned entry criteria.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".