Best practice recommendations for the clinical care of spinal bulbar muscular atrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although rare in the general population, spinal bulbar muscular atrophy (SBMA) is an X-linked recessive neuromuscular condition that is highly prevalent in people identifying as First Nations and Métis in western Canada. The aim of this guideline is to improve and standardize care of SBMA, and to increase awareness of the condition. METHODS: Our interdisciplinary working group conducted a needs assessment survey to aid in the development of guideline topic questions, followed by a literature search, evidence review, and external review by health practitioners and people with lived experience. We followed the ADAPTE framework to evaluate the only pre-existing SBMA guideline (2020 French national protocol) and the 2020 Canadian amyotrophic lateral sclerosis guideline for appropriateness of adaptation. Our process adhered to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool; used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach; and followed the Guidelines International Network-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist. Indigenous community engagement was led by the Pewaseskwan Indigenous Research Group, who participated in the development of the guideline. RECOMMENDATIONS: We developed 41 recommendations to address the continuum of care in SBMA, including diagnosis; multidisciplinary teams; management of limb and bulbar symptoms, respiratory and cardiac complications, and multisystem symptoms; female carriers; emotional supports; and considerations for Indigenous people. Spinal bulbar muscular atrophy is best managed by multidisciplinary teams that can address both its motor and nonmotor manifestations, including cardiac involvement, sensory symptoms, and metabolic dysfunction. Concerns for female carriers may include symptom management and genetic counselling. Providers should ensure culturally appropriate care for Indigenous people. INTERPRETATION: In this guideline, we provide health care professionals with a culturally responsive standard of care for SBMA, and hope this will translate into improved quality of life for people affected by SBMA.
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 | 0.059 | 0.237 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.011 |
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".