MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6902490235 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6158159

Optimising care and follow-up of adults with achondroplasia

2022· other· en· W6902490235 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAchondroplasiaPulmonologistsMultidisciplinary approachNationalityYoung adultHealth careHealth professionalsRehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Achondroplasia is a genetic condition that can cause complications across the lifespan. While complications in childhood are well documented, the natural history of achondroplasia in adults has, until recently, been relatively lacking, and little is known about the care they receive or how they access it. The European Achondroplasia Forum undertook two exploratory surveys, one for healthcare professionals (HCPs) and one for patient advocacy group (PAG) representatives, to gain an understanding of current practices of the transition process of individuals with achondroplasia from paediatric to adult services and how adults perceive their care. Results Most HCP respondents followed up more children than adults, and 8/15 responded that individuals did not transition to an adult multidisciplinary team (MDT) after paediatric care. Of 10 PAG respondents, none considered the experience of transition to adult services as good or very good and 50% considered it to be poor or very poor. A total of 64% (7/11) described the coordination of transition to adult services as “Not satisfactory” or “Poor”. HCPs and PAG representatives largely agreed on the core specialists involved in adult care (orthopaedic surgeons, physiotherapists, rehabilitation specialists, rheumatologists, clinical geneticists). However, there was a discrepancy in the understanding of healthcare needs outside of this, with PAG representatives selecting neurosurgeons and genetic counsellors, while HCPs selected pulmonologists and obstetricians/gynaecologists. There was agreement between HCP and PAG respondents on the key barriers to effective care of adults with achondroplasia, with lack of an adult MDT, lack of interest from individuals in accessing care, and less experience in adult than paediatric MDTs ranking highly. Conclusions This study indicates that the care and follow up of adults with achondroplasia is challenging. Individuals are often lost to, or decline, follow up as they leave paediatric care, and it is largely unknown how, where, and why adults with achondroplasia access care later in life. Lifelong, multidisciplinary specialist care led by an identified physician should be accessible to all individuals with achondroplasia. It is important to ensure barriers to optimal care are addressed to enable access to appropriate care for all individuals with achondroplasia.

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)0.008
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→French-language works237,207→