MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409672830 · doi:10.1093/pch/8.6.345

A rational approach to the child with mental retardation for the paediatrician

2003· article· en· W2409672830 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-François Lemay, Anthony Herbert, Deborah Dewey, A. Micheil Innes

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEtiologyDilemmaDiversity (politics)PediatricsMedicinePsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mental Retardation (MR) is a problem encountered in almost all paediatric clinical settings. The assessment of a child with MR is a common diagnostic and management dilemma for paediatricians. The field of MR research is currently in a state of flux regarding not just our understanding of the condition, but also in the language and the processes we use in naming, defining and describing MR. This article will provide a better understanding and a rational approach toward MR. Prevalence rates for MR are variable in the literature and may be attributable to the variation in major classification systems and the diversity in study operation definitions and methodologies. Etiologies of MR are diverse and include many different influences. MR most often presents during infancy or preschool years as developmental delay. There is no universally accepted approach to the etiological work-up of mental retardation. The number of medical conditions associated with MR that are completely treatable by medical means remains small. The paediatrician plays a key role establishing short and long term treatment goals, as well as providing support to families who have children with MR.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0080.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207