MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4280507547 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057947

Needs of patients with parkinsonism and their caregivers: a protocol for the PRIME-UK cross-sectional study

2022· article· en· W4280507547 on OpenAlexaff
Emma Tenison, Fiona E. Lithander, Matthew D. Smith, Danielle Pendry-Brazier, Yoav Ben‐Shlomo, Emily J. Henderson

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public Health
FundersGatsby Charitable FoundationWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineCross-sectional studyParkinsonismProtocol (science)Family medicineEpidemiologyGerontologyAlternative medicinePathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: People with parkinsonism are a highly heterogeneous group and the disease encompasses a spectrum of motor and non-motor symptoms which variably emerge and manifest across the disease course, fluctuate over time and negatively impact quality of life. While parkinsonism is not directly the result of ageing, it is a condition that mostly affects older people, who may also be living with frailty and multimorbidity. This study aims to describe the broad range of health needs for people with parkinsonism and their carers in relation to their symptomatology, disability, disease stage, comorbidities and sociodemographic characteristics. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this single site cross-sectional study, people with parkinsonism will be sent a study information pack for themselves and their primary informal caregiver, if relevant. Data are collected via questionnaire, with additional support, if required, to maximise participation. A specific strategy has been developed to target and proactively recruit patients lacking capacity to consent, including those in residential care settings, with input from a personal consultee prior to completion of a bespoke questionnaire by a representative. Caregivers are also recruited to look at various health outcomes. Results will be displayed as descriptive statistics and regression models will be used to test simple associations and interactions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol was approved by the London-Brighton & Sussex Research Ethics Committee (REC reference 20/LO/0890). The results of this protocol will be disseminated through publication in an international peer-reviewed journal; presentation at academic meetings and conferences; and a lay summary uploaded to the PRIME-Parkinson website. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11452969; Pre-results.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0500.011

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments→French-language works237,207→