MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2491889224 · doi:10.1093/ije/dyv096.187

Trend in Stroke Incidence in Shiga, Japan, 1990–2010.

2015· article· en· W2491889224 on OpenAlexaff
Masato Nagai, Yoshikuni Kita, Naoyuki Takashima, Yoshitaka Murakami, Robert D. Abbott, Tanvir Chowdhury Turin, Nahid Rumana, Katsuyuki Miura, Hirotsugu Ueshima

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Epidemiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStroke (engine)Incidence (geometry)MedicineEpidemiologyDemographyEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Stroke mortality and incidence began to decline in Japan in the 1960s. Our population-based registry of stroke incidence using data collected from 1990 to 2001 has previously shown that this decline may have levelled off or slowed down. Whether this pattern of change continues in the decade that follows is uncertain. We examined the recent trend in stroke incidence in Japan using the same registry with follow-up extended to 2010. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Takashima Stroke Registry covering approximately 55,000 residents of Takashima Country in Shiga, Japan. We estimated the gender-specific age-adjusted first-ever stroke incidence rates (/100,000 person-years) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) using Byar's method in three year intervals during 1990–2010. For age adjustment, we used direct standardization based on the world standard population distribution in 2000–25 from the World Health Organization. Ages were categorized into ranges of < 35, 35–44, 45–54, 55–64, 65–74, 75–84, and ≥85 years.

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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.296 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of EpidemiologySame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207