MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412166835 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2025.10236

P.070 Delay to diagnosis of Duchenne muscular dystrophy

2025· article· en· W4412166835 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maureen Rodrigue, E Hill-Smith, Amanda Yaworski, HJ McMillan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuchenne muscular dystrophyMuscular dystrophyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) typically presents with painless weakness which may contribute to its delayed recognition. Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed for patients with DMD at CHEO over 15 years (2009-2023). Our data will later be combined with that from two other centers. Inclusion criteria: 1) confirmed DMD; 2) symptom onset <6 yo. Exclusion criteria: incomplete records or family history of DMD. Results: We identified 72 DMD patients. Total of N=49 were analyzed. Subjects were excluded for: incomplete data N=10 (e.g. diagnosis at another centre); symptom onset ≥6 yo (N=4); family history (N=9). First symptoms were reported at a mean age of 2.7 yo (range: 0-5.9 yo) with diagnosis at mean age of 5.2 yo (range: 0.5 to 9.6 yo), representing a mean delay of 2.5 years (range: 0-6.8 yrs). Initial symptoms included: weakness (61.2%), sports difficulty (61.2%), calf pseudohypertrophy (10.2%), language difficulties (8.2%) or muscle pain (2.0%). Learning disability was reported in 36 (73.5%) subjects with 7 (14.3%) having autistic spectrum disorder. Conclusions: The mean delay to diagnosis of patients followed at our centre was similar to the United Kingdom (MDSTARnet). We advocate for increased education to identify DMD earlier, particularly given emerging therapies for this disorder.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicMuscle Physiology and Disorders→French-language works237,207→