MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924806902 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxy172

An epidemiologic overview of a tertiary referral practice for male paediatric lichen sclerosus

2019· article· en· W2924806902 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dylan Hoare, Peter Metcalfe

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenital Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLichen sclerosusDysuriaIncidence (geometry)ReferralEpidemiologyPediatricsPopulationRetrospective cohort studyDermatologyCohortPresentation (obstetrics)Urinary systemSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within the paediatric population, changing patterns of circumcisions have confounded the epidemiology and presentation of lichen sclerosus (LS). We sought to evaluate the incidence, demographics, and clinical features of patients presenting to a single Albertan paediatric urologist with LS. This retrospective descriptive analysis evaluated all paediatric patients referred for phimosis to a single paediatric urologist in Edmonton, Alberta. Chief complaints/symptoms, date of birth, and date of circumcision were identified. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of circumcisions with pathologically confirmed LS. From July 2006 to March 2016, 4,163 patients were seen for phimosis of the approximate 12,000 new referrals. Hundred phimosis patients had clinically suspected LS. Of those adequately reported, 81 (81/83) were microscopically confirmed to be LS with a mean age of 9.6 years and median age of 8.9 years (range 4.1 to 16.1 years). This cohort represented 2.0% of phimosis referrals and approximately 0.7% of all referrals to our paediatric urologist. When compared to physiologic phimosis, these patients had higher rates of dysuria (n=28, 34.6% versus n=1, 1.0%, P<0.0001) and urinary retention (n=18, 22.2% versus n=1, 1.0%, P<0.0001) as presenting complaints. LS of the paediatric male genitalia is an uncommon, albeit clinically significant disease entity. The clinical diagnosis for the trained practitioner is very accurate.

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)0.002
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 score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicGenital Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207