MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392124451 · doi:10.2188/jea.je20230241

Progress Report of the Tohoku Medical Megabank Community-based Cohort Study: Study Profile of the Repeated Center-based Survey During Second Period in Miyagi Prefecture

2024· article· en· W4392124451 on OpenAlexaff
Atsushi Hozawa, Kumi Nakaya, Naoki Nakaya, Tomohiro Nakamura, Mana Kogure, Rieko Hatanaka, Ippei Chiba, Ikumi Kanno, Junichi Sugawara, Eiichi Kodama, Yohei Hamanaka, Tomoko Kobayashi, Akira Uruno, Naho Tsuchiya, Takumi Hirata, Akira Narita, Akito Tsuboi, Toru Tamahara, Akihito Otsuki, Maki Goto, Makiko Taira, Ritsuko Shimizu, Kichiya Suzuki, Taku Obara, Masahiro Kikuya, Hirohito Metoki, Mami Ishikuro, Inaho Danjoh, Soichi Ogishima, Satoshi Nagaie, Naoko Minegishi, Masahiro Hiratsuka, Kazuki Kumada, Ichiko Nishijima, Takahiro Nobukuni, Yumi Yamaguchi‐Kabata, Fuji Nagami, Shigeo Kure, Nobuo Fuse, Kengo Kinoshita, Yoko Izumi, Shinichi Kuriyama, Masayuki Yamamoto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Epidemiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Aging
FundersMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyJapan Agency for Medical Research and Development
KeywordsMedicineCenter (category theory)Cohort studyCohortInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to report the basic profile of the Miyagi Prefecture part of a repeated center-based survey during the second period of the Tohoku Medical Megabank Community-Based Cohort Study (TMM CommCohort Study), as well as the participants' characteristics based on their participation type in the baseline survey. METHODS: The second period survey, conducted from June 2017 to March 2021, included participants of the TMM CommCohort Study (May 2013 to March 2016). In addition to the questionnaire, blood, urine, and physiological function tests were performed during the second period survey. There were three main ways of participation in the baseline survey: Type 1, Type 1 additional, or Type 2 survey. The second period survey was conducted in the same manner as the Type 2 survey, which was based on the community support center (CSC). RESULTS: In Miyagi Prefecture, 29,383 (57.7%) of 50,967 participants participated in the second period survey. The participation rate among individuals who had visited the CSC was approximately 80%. Although some factors differed depending on the participation type in the baseline survey, the second period survey respondents in the Type 1 and Type 2 survey groups at baseline had similar traits. CONCLUSION: The second period survey of the TMM CommCohort Study provided detailed follow-up information. Following up on the health conditions of the participants will clarify the long-term effects of disasters and contribute to personalized prevention.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.350 · 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
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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EpidemiologySame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207