Childhood head trauma and the risk of childhood brain tumours: A case‐control study in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Head trauma in early childhood has been hypothesized as a potential risk factor for childhood brain tumours (CBTs). However, head trauma has not been extensively studied in the context of CBTs and existing studies have yielded conflicting results. A population-based and hospital-based case-control study of children 0 to 15 years with newly diagnosed CBTs from 1997 to 2003 recruited across Ontario through paediatric oncology centres was conducted. Controls were frequency-matched with cases by age, sex and geographical region. The association was assessed based on multivariable logistic regressions, accounting for child's age, sex, ethnicity, highest level of maternal education and maternal pack-years of smoking during the pregnancy. Analyses were conducted separately based on age of first head trauma, sex and histology. A latency period analysis was conducted. Overall, based on 280 cases and 919 controls, CBTs were not significantly associated with previous history of head trauma (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.96, 1.86), head trauma severity, number of head injuries, or head or neck X-rays or computed tomography (CT) examinations. Results were consistent across sexes and histological subtypes. However, head trauma within the first year of life was significantly associated with CBTs (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.01, 3.98), but the association diminished when adjusted for X-ray or CT occurring during the same time period (OR 1.62, 95% CI 0.75, 3.49), albeit limited sample size. Overall, no association was observed between head trauma and CBTs among all children, while head trauma occurring within first year of life may warrant further investigation in future research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".