86 Incidence of Pulmonary Thromboembolism in Canadian Children: A 3-Year National Surveillance Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction/Background Pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE) is a rare but life-threatening event for which adequate epidemiological data in paediatrics are lacking. Best estimates regarding the epidemiology of PTE in Canadian children were published over two decades ago, using information obtained from a national registry of paediatric thromboembolic disease which only examined pulmonary embolism as a related complication. It is likely that the true rates of pulmonary thromboembolism in Canadian children are higher. Objectives To determine the minimum national incidence of PTE in children (neonate up to <18 years) by age, gender, and province / territory of residence using an existing national surveillance system. Design/Methods Through the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance program, over 2,800 paediatricians and subspecialists practicing in Canada were contacted monthly from January 2020 to December 2022. Using a standardized definition of PTE and pre-specified diagnostic criteria, clinicians were requested to report all new suspected or confirmed cases. Results During the 3-year study period, 58 cases of PTE were reported, documenting a minimum average annual national incidence of 2.4 per million Canadian children. Females accounted for 77.6% (n=45) cases. Patients ranged in age from 2 months to 17.9 years (median age 15.8 years; interquartile rate 13.3 to 16.7 years). Incidence rates (reported as average annual per million children) varied by age: 0-4 years, 0.7; 5-9 years, 0.2; 10-14 years, 2.0; 15-18 years, 6.6; and also by province: Newfoundland, 21.3; Saskatchewan, 4.6; British Columbia, 4.5; New Brunswick, 4.4; Alberta, 3.5; Nova Scotia, 1.8; Ontario, 1.6; Manitoba, 1.0; Quebec, 0.9. Conclusion Although the overall minimum average annual national incidence of PTE in Canada is 2.4 per million children, adolescents, particularly females, appear to be at highest risk of disease. It is not clear whether geographic distribution of cases disproportionate to provincial census may be related to regional differences in diagnostic practices, population-related risk factors (e.g., obesity, genetic thrombophilias, OCP prescribing), or reporting of cases.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".