MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912317986 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025436

Association between child maltreatment and central sensitivity syndromes: a systematic review protocol

2019· review· en· W2912317986 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joht Singh Chandan, Tom Thomas, Karim Raza, Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay, Krishnarajah Nirantharakumar, Julie Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of BirminghamNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Association (psychology)Poison controlPsychiatryEnvironmental healthAlternative medicinePathologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: A growing body of evidence is identifying the link between a history of child maltreatment and a variety of adverse health outcomes ultimately leading to significant social and healthcare burden. Initial work has identified a potential association between child maltreatment and the development of a selection of somatic and visceral central sensitivity syndromes: fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, temporomandibular joint disorder, chronic lower back pain, chronic neck pain, chronic pelvic pain, interstitial cystitis, vulvodynia, chronic prostatitis, tension-type headache, migraine, myofascial pain syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome and restless legs syndrome. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Primary electronic searches will be performed in the Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, PyscINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Library databases and a number of Grey Literature sources including child protection and paediatric conference proceedings. Following independent screening of studies by two review authors, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses template will be used to aid extraction. A meta-analysis will be conducted on the included case-control and cohort studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa grading system will be used to assess the quality of included studies. Results will be expressed as pooled ORs for binary data and mean differences for continuous data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval will not be required. The final results of the review and meta-analysis will be submitted for peer-review publication and also disseminated at relevant conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018089258.

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)0.069
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0690.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.013
Bibliometrics0.0140.014
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0920.013

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207