MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6976811231 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.12319517

A systematic review of morbidities suggestive of the multiple sclerosis prodrome

2020· article· en· W6976811231 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Agent-Based Network Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProdromeCINAHLMultiple sclerosisMigrainePsycINFOCognitionQuality of life (healthcare)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The identification of a prodromal phase in multiple sclerosis (MS) could have major implications for earlier recognition and management of MS. The authors conducted a systematic review assessing studies of morbidities before, or at, MS onset or diagnosis.<b>Areas covered</b>: Two independent reviewers searched Medline, Embase, Psycinfo and CINAHL from inception to February 8<sup>th</sup>, 2019. To be eligible, studies had to be published in English and report the relative occurrence of at least one morbidity or symptom before, or at, MS onset or diagnosis among MS cases in comparison to a control group not known to have MS. Findings were narratively synthesized. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS, maximum score 9).<b>Expert opinion</b>: Twenty-nine studies were included, which comprised 83,590 MS cases and 396,343 controls. Most were case-control studies (25/29), 8/29 were of high quality (NOS≥8) and 19/29 examined the period before MS symptom onset. Most studies assessing anxiety, depression, migraine and lower cognitive performance found these conditions to be more prevalent before MS onset or diagnosis relative to controls. There was limited evidence to implicate other conditions. Thus, there is evidence that anxiety, depression, migraine and lower cognitive performance form part of the MS prodrome.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.151 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicMobile Agent-Based Network ManagementFrench-language works237,207