MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886902670 · doi:10.1186/s41512-018-0042-5

Chronic Disease Population Risk Tool (CDPoRT): a study protocol for a prediction model that assesses population-based chronic disease incidence

2018· article· en· W2886902670 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ryan Ng, Rinku Sutradhar, Walter P. Wodchis, Laura C. Rosella

Bibliographic record

VenueDiagnostic and Prognostic Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesTrillium Health CentreUniversity of TorontoToronto Public Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsMedicinePopulationCohortDiseaseIncidence (geometry)Cohort studyEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Population-based risk prediction tools exist for individual chronic diseases. From a population health perspective, studying chronic diseases together provides a comprehensive view of the burden of disease in the population. Thus, public health officials and health policymakers would benefit from a prediction tool that measures the incidence of chronic diseases compositely. This study protocol proposes the development and validation of the Chronic Disease Population Risk Tool (CDPoRT) that will predict the incidence of six chronic diseases in the population setting using multivariable modeling techniques. CDPoRT will be built using population-based responses to the first six cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey linked to health administrative data in Ontario and Manitoba from 2000 to 2014. Predictors including modifiable lifestyle risk factors (i.e., alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking, diet, and physical activity) will be used to predict time-to-chronic disease incidence (i.e., congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, lung cancer, myocardial infarction, and stroke including transient ischemic heart attack). Sex-specific Royston-Parmar models will be used for model development and validation with death free of chronic disease as a competing risk. CDPoRT will be developed using an Ontario derivation cohort consisting of 47,960 females and 38,267 males with 7035 and 6220 chronic disease events, respectively. The model will be validated using split-sample validation using an Ontario validation cohort consisting of 20,325 females and 16,627 males with 2972 and 2658 chronic disease events, respectively. The model will be externally validated in the Manitoba validation cohort (i.e., geographic validation) expected to consist of 11,800 females and 9700 males with 1650 and 1550 chronic disease events, respectively. Measures of overall predictive accuracy (e.g., Nagelkerke’s R 2 ), discrimination (e.g., Harrell’s concordance statistic), and calibration (e.g., calibration plots) will be used to assess predictive performance. To the extent of our knowledge, CDPoRT will be the first population-based regression prediction model that will predict the incidence of multiple chronic diseases simultaneously at the population level.

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)0.062
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0620.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.010

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.329 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiagnostic and Prognostic ResearchSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207