MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390200549 · doi:10.1002/alz.077986

#FTDQuickQuestions: An FTD Disorders Registry (FTDDR) Monthly Engagement Survey to Gather Real‐time Insights to Inform Research

2023· article· en· W4390200549 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sherry Harlass, Lakecia Vincent, Sweatha Reddy, Robert Reinecker, Penny A. Dacks, Dianna K. Wheaton

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRespondentPollingPsychologyMedicineFamily medicineMedical educationComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Frontotemporal degeneration is a group of rare brain diseases that cause progressive changes to behavior, personality, language, and movement with onset typically before age 60. There are no treatments or cures. FTDDR is an international, web‐based registry (participants n>5,700) that facilitates clinical trial enrollment by collecting disease insights, summarizing data, and mobilizing potential research volunteers. FTDDR uses various data collection and engagement tools to interact with participants and the community at large. Quick Questions was concepted as a mechanism to gather real‐time, cross‐sectional, anonymous data from a broad response‐base not limited by Registry participation. Method #FTDQuickQuestions campaign incorporates social, email, and web to reach members and visitors to collect their data, strengthen existing relationships, connect with people who could benefit from Registry services, and inform research. Each month a pre‐approved question was posted to Facebook and Twitter, linking to a webform with polling options and collected for 2 weeks. Respondent’s location is indexed through IP address. Additionally, the question was emailed to FTDDR participants with brief highlights of the previous survey and a link to view results for it and prior surveys. Full summaries were posted as weblogs. Result The survey was launched in June 2022 with the question: Have you tried to get genetic testing for FTD over the last 3 years? Questions have related to FTD research participation, age of diagnosis, age first symptom appeared, where diagnosed person lived. At least one other demographic question is asked to characterize the respondent, including gender or relationship to FTD‐diagnosed person. Number of respondents for the first 7 questions ranged between 555‐857; monthly average 735. Except the initial survey, >75% of responses were received within 24 hours of email. Responses reflect 41 countries; including all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia; and 10 Canadian provinces/territories. Majority are women (62%); a third men (35%); 3% declined providing gender. Conclusion FTDDR’s #FTDQuickQuestions is a successful monthly engagement mechanism that enables quick, timely responses to questions about this disease and the people affected by it. While related questions cannot be compared nor connected, this valuable information serves as a cross‐sectional snapshot to inform FTD 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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.032

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.269 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingFrench-language works237,207