MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2442428099 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2016.222

P.123 Assessing level of awareness, attitudes and believes toward pediatric congenital neurosurgical conditions

2016· article· en· W2442428099 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
MA Hasen, Ahmed Ammar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRespondentSpina bifidaFamily medicinePublic healthQuality of life (healthcare)PediatricsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Community awareness, attitudes and beleifs toward pediatric patients diagnosed with congenital neurosurgical conditions is not known in the Saudi population and the number of studies is few worldwide. Such attitudes have a direct impact on the quality of life of patients with these congenital conditions. This study aims to demonstrate the variation in awareness, attitudes and believes in the public and among health-care professionals towards patients diagnosed with congenital neurosurgical conditions and its associated factors. Methods: A survey consisting of 36 questions pertaining to Hydrocephalus, Brain Tumors and Spina Bifida awareness, attitudes and believes was distributed to Saudi citizens living in the eastern province older than 15 years of age among hospitals visitors, medical students, nutritionists, physicians, dentists, pharmacists, and nurses. Results: The analysis of the 1002 respondent of the questionnaire shows clear social stigmata and improper awareness, attitudes and believes toward pediatric patients diagnosed with congenital neurosurgical conditions. There are variable parameters on interest measured and analyzed and there are certain patterns observed as well. Conclusions: The analysis showed the importance of health education for the public to increase the level of awareness and it justifies why these factors should be addressed in the middle of patients’ management, community awareness and health planning.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare→French-language works237,207→