MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W28520565 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100054081

Prevalence of Childhood Epilepsy in Canada

2011· article· en· W28520565 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Asuri N. Prasad, Xianzheng Sang, Bradley A. Corbett, Jorge G. Burneo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyMedicineCohortPopulationPediatricsDemographyPrevalencePillCohort studyPsychiatryEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: Few data exist on the frequency and burden of childhood epilepsy in Canada and on the impact in the general population. We have assessed the point prevalence of childhood epilepsy in Canada. METHODS: We analyzed data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (N=20 025 for Cycle 2, and N= 31 960 for cycle 3). Each cycle was collected over a two year period (2: 1996-1997, 3: 1998-1999). In the survey the following specific question was asked to the person most knowledgeable in the household: "Does the child have any of the following long-term conditions that have been diagnosed by a health professional?" The list of responses included Epilepsy and certain co-morbid conditions. In addition, a subsequent question identified whether the condition was treated by means of a specific anticonvulsant medication. (anticonvulsants or anti-epileptic pills?). Prevalence was based on the national standard population at the time of each survey. RESULTS: In Cycle 2, 80 of 20 025 subjects from 0 to 13 years old were described to have the diagnosis of epilepsy, yielding a weighted point prevalence of 4.03 per 1 000. In Cycle 3 161 of 31 960 children from 0 to 15 were described as having epilepsy, yielding a weighted point prevalence of 5.26 per 1 000. The rate of epilepsy was higher for males and increases with age. CONCLUSION: The overall rates for this age cohort are consistent with those obtained in other developed countries and seem to coincide with rates for youth and adults in Canada.

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)0.003
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations35
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207