MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293572092 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065005

Canadian clinical capacity for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder assessment, diagnosis, disclosure and support to children and adolescents: a cross-sectional study

2022· article· en· W4293572092 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erika N. Dugas, Martine Poirier, Dominique Basque, Nadia Bouhamdani, Laure LeBreton, Nicole J. LeBlanc

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MonctonUniversité de SherbrookeVitalité Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderCross-sectional studyFamily medicinePediatricsPublic healthPregnancyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Canadian fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) guidelines encourage an age-specific interdisciplinary diagnostic approach. However, there is currently no standard-of-care regarding FASD diagnosis disclosure and few studies document Canadian FASD clinical capacity. Our objectives were to describe clinical capacity (defined as skills and resources) for FASD assessment, diagnosis, disclosure and support in Canada. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data were drawn from the CanDiD study, a cross-sectional investigation of Canadian FASD clinical capacity. Forty-one clinics participated in the study. Data were collected in 2021 on the number and types of health professionals included in the assessment and diagnostic teams, the presence (or absence) of a minor patient when the FASD diagnosis is disclosed to parents/guardians, who is responsible for the diagnosis disclosure, the use of explanatory tools, and the types of support/counselling services available. The proportion of clinics that follow the Canadian interdisciplinary diagnostic guidelines by age group is described among participating clinics. RESULTS: Overall, 21, 13 and 7 specialised FASD clinics were in Western/Northern, Central and Atlantic Canada, respectively. The number of referrals per year surpassed the number of diagnostic assessments completed in all regions. Approximately, 60% of clinics who diagnosed FASD in infants and preschool children (n=4/7 and 15/25, respectively) followed the interdisciplinary guidelines compared with 80% (n=32/40) in clinics who diagnosed school-aged children/adolescents. Diagnostic reporting practices were heterogeneous, but most used an explanatory tool with children/adolescents (67%), offered support/counselling (90-95%) and used case-by-case approach (80%) when deciding who would disclose the diagnosis to the child/adolescent and when. CONCLUSIONS: Limited diagnostic capacity and lack of FASD resources across Canada highlights a critical need for continued FASD support. This study identifies gaps in assessment, diagnosis and reporting practices for FASD in children/adolescents across Canada.

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)0.002
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 score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207