The Quebec Low Back Pain Study: a protocol for an innovative 2-tier provincial cohort
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The neurobiological mechanisms underlying recovery from or persistence of low back pain (LBP) remain misunderstood, limiting progress toward effective management. We have developed an innovative two-tier design to study the transition from acute to chronic LBP. The objective of the first tier is to create a provincial web-based infrastructure to recruit and monitor the trajectory of individuals with acute LBP. The objective of the second tier is to fuel hypothesis-driven satellite data collection centers with specialized expertise to study the role of biomechanical, epigenetic, genetic, neuroanatomical, ontological, physiological, psychological, and socioeconomic factors in LBP chronicity. METHODS: This article describes the first tier of the protocol: establishment of the Core Dataset and Cohort. Adults with acute LBP will be recruited through networks, media, and health care settings. A web-based interface will be used to collect self-reported variables at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. Acute LBP will be defined according to the Dionne 2008 consensus. Measurements will include the Canadian minimum data set for chronic LBP research, DN4 for neuropathic pain, comorbidities, EQ-5D-5L for quality of life, and linkage with provincial medico-administrative databases. The primary outcome will be the transition to chronic LBP, as defined by Deyo 2014. Secondary outcomes include health care resource utilization, disability, sick leave, mood, and quality of life. PERSPECTIVE: This study brings together diverse research expertise to investigate the transition from acute to chronic LBP, characterize the progression to recovery or chronicity, and identify patterns associated with that progression.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it