MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4206460863 · doi:10.3410/f.717962626.793464619

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Quality of life in children with new-onset epilepsy: a 2-year prospective cohort study.

2012· dataset· en· W4206460863 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Adam L. Hartman, Monica E. Lemmon

Bibliographic record

VenueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · 2012
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychosocialMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Prospective cohort studyCohortCohort studyPopulationEpilepsyPediatricsCognitionPhysical therapyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To assess health-related quality of life (HRQL) over 2 years in children 4-12 years old with new-onset epilepsy and risk factors.METHODS: Data are from a multicenter prospective cohort study, the Health-Related Quality of Life Study in Children with Epilepsy Study (HERQULES). Parents reported on children's HRQL and family factors and neurologists on clinical characteristics 4 times. Mean subscale and summary scores were computed for HRQL. Individual growth curve models identified trajectories of change in HRQL scores. Multiple regression identified baseline risk factors for HRQL 2 years later.RESULTS: A total of 374 (82) questionnaires were returned postdiagnosis and 283 (62%) of eligible parents completed all 4. Growth rates for HRQL summary scores were most rapid during the first 6 months and then stabilized. About one-half experienced clinically meaningful improvements in HRQL, one-third maintained their same level, and one-fifth declined. Compared with the general population, at 2 years our sample scored significantly lower on one-third of CHQ subscales and the psychosocial summary. After controlling for baseline HRQL, cognitive problems, poor family functioning, and high family demands were risk factors for poor HRQL 2 years later.CONCLUSIONS: On average, HRQL was relatively good but with highly variable individual trajectories. At least one-half did not experience clinically meaningful improvements or declined over 2 years. Cognitive problems were the strongest risk factor for compromised HRQL 2 years after diagnosis and may be largely responsible for declines in the HRQL of children newly diagnosed with epilepsy. PMID: 23019268 Funding information This work was supported by: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Canada Grant ID: MOP-64311

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.011

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.349 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature→Same topicEpilepsy research and treatment→French-language works237,207→