MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Padiatric Asthma in Canada 2016: A cross-sectional study in primary care

2020· article· en· W3096141947 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew Cave, Christina Gillies, Sylvia Aponte-Hao, Boglárka Soós, Tyler Williamson, Neil Drummond

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaPrimary careMedical prescriptionPediatricsCohortDemographicsCross-sectional studyAge groupsMedical recordFamily medicineDemographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada , 70% of paediatric asthma is managed in primary care. Different collection methods and venues produce a range of values for prevalence and patient demographics. We aimed to (1) describe both of these as seen in primary care in Canada using the national primary care database of the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network which contains data from 1.8 million patients9 electronic medical records (2) the characteristics of children with asthma in Canada and (3) aspects of the management in primary care. We conducted a cross-sectional study of asthma in children between the ages of 1 and 17 in 2016 and the medications that they were prescribed. We used a validated search algorithm to extract data on children with asthma who had no gaps in the diagnosis greater than 3 years. The prevalence of asthma in this primary care cohort in 2016 was 18.07% (N=44,679). 52% males. Median age was 9 with a mean of 9.4. The median age of onset of the asthma was 7 years (mean 7.1). Prevalence reached a trough at age 12 and peaked at age 4 in both sexes and again in girls at age 17. Boys out numbered girls at all ages up to age 15. Twice as many girls had asthma onset at 16 or at 17 than did boys. Prevalence in the 1-3 year age group was 13%, before 6 was 17% and between 12 and 18 years was 20% Half the children had no recorded prescription for asthma in 2016. 13% had only ever had salbutamol as therapy. 66% had EVER had an ICS (7% in a combination inhaler) 1% had ever had prednisone . Though 26% had seen the physician in the last 12 months, only 4% had a recorded visit for asthma. Despite a high prevalence of childhood asthma , only 1% had severe asthma. Visits were irregular. More structure is needed.

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)0.003
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAsthma and respiratory diseases→French-language works237,207→