MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996680538 · doi:10.1055/s-0039-3400974

Neurodevelopmental Disabilities in Canadian Children: Prevalence Data from the National Longitudinal Study of Children and Youth

2019· article· en· W2996680538 on OpenAlexaffabout
Asuri N. Prasad, Bradley A. Corbett

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Neurology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityChildren's Hospital of Western OntarioLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral palsyMedicineDemographyConfidence intervalPopulationCensusLogistic regressionPrevalencePediatricsEnvironmental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Using population surveys of chronic health conditions, the present study aimed to examine changing trends in the prevalence of neurodevelopmental disabilities (NDD) with age and determine population-based estimates of prevalence and census-based estimates of absolute numbers of affected children. Methods We analyzed data from three cycles (1994–1999) of Canada's National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY) (Statistics Canada Survey). Results Cross-sectional prevalence rates for chronic NDD in children from birth to 15 years across cycle 1 to 3 of the NLSCY show an increasing trend over the years from 1994 to 1999. Population-based estimates were also calculated from census data. Weighted prevalence rates for four conditions in children aged birth to 15 years increased across the three cycles, except for cerebral palsy. Prevalence estimates in cycle 3 were: epilepsy 5.26/1,000 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.01, 5.52), cerebral palsy 2.81/1,000 (95% CI: 2.62, 2.99), intellectual disability 4.77/1,000 (95% CI: 4.53, 5.02), and learning disability 57.06/1,000 (95% CI, 56.36, 57.76). A male gender preponderance was noted for each NDD using logistic regression. Interpretation Prevalence rates of NDD in Canadian children show an incremental trend across three cycles in four conditions covered in the survey. The changing trends over the three cycles are discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric NeurologySame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207