MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2442789366

The prevalence of diabetes in the Cree of western James Bay.

2000· article· en· W2442789366 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maberley Da, King W, Cruess Af

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusPopulationConfidence intervalDemographyPrevalenceGerontologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicineEndocrinology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diabetes prevalence and general demographic data for individuals with diabetes were evaluated in the Cree of Moose Factory, Ontario. Individuals with diabetes were identified through a retrospective review of the diabetes registry as well as of outpatient and inpatient records. The crude prevalence of diabetes was 62 (95% confidence interval: 54 72) per 1,000. The direct age-standardized prevalence of diabetes was 103 per 1,000 for the entire population (95% confidence interval: 89 118 per 1,000, standardized to the 1991 Canadian population). The estimated rate of diabetes in the Canadian population is approximately 5%. The average age of individuals with diabetes in the community was 53 years; the average duration of diabetes was 8.2 years. Most of the population with diabetes were female (64 %) and were using anti-hypertensive medications (64%). This study presents diabetes prevalence data for the population of Moose Factory, Ontario, that indicate a higher prevalence than in both the Canadian population and other Cree populations in the region.

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)0.001
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 score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations19
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicIndigenous Studies and Ecology→French-language works237,207→