MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412179890 · doi:10.1002/cns3.70019

Considerations in Transition of Pediatric Neurology Patients to Adult Care

2025· article· en· W4412179890 on OpenAlexaff
Asif Doja, Katherine Muir, Megan Harrison, Sarah Healy, Ashley Vandermorris, Alène Toulany

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Child Neurology Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurologyAdult carePediatric NeurologyTransition (genetics)MedicinePediatricsPsychiatryGerontologyYoung adultChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Transition refers to the planned, coordinated movement of adolescents from the child- and family-centered environment of pediatric care to the adult healthcare system. A well-structured transition process is essential for ensuring adolescents with chronic health conditions continue to thrive in young adulthood. Poor transitions can lead to negative health outcomes, worsening of comorbidities such as anxiety and depression, and poorer psychosocial well-being. Methods: This topical review combines literature from general pediatrics, adolescent medicine, general child neurology, and child neurology subspecialities to provide holistic recommendations for the transition of pediatric patients to adulthood. Conclusions: Core principles of transition include starting transition planning early, creating individualized transition plans, providing support before transition, and ensuring ongoing support after transition to adult care. For adolescents with neurological conditions, additional considerations include recognizing that many childhood neurological disorders are now lifelong conditions, addressing the impact of varying levels of intellectual disability, reevaluating the diagnosis at the time of transfer, and establishing emergency care planning.

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)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueAnnals of the Child Neurology SocietySame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207