MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1483145723 · doi:10.1093/pch/10.7.423

Questions and answers on immunization

2005· article· en· W1483145723 on OpenAlexaff
David W. Scheifele, Simon Dobson

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunizationAspleniaMedicinePediatricsImmunologySpleenAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

QUESTION: What constitutes optimal pneumococcal immunization for children with splenic dysfunction or asplenia? COMMENT: This is a very important question for paediatricians and one that causes confusion. All provinces now have routine immunization programs that include seven-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7), but children with asplenia will continue to need special attention from paediatricians for additional immunizations and illness evaluations. Children with absent or diminished splenic function are at markedly increased risk for invasive pneumococcal infections (and other infections not reviewed here) (1). Bloodstream infection can progress rapidly, causing septic shock and other life-threatening complications. Importantly, the risk of pneumococcal infection is abnormally elevated throughout childhood, although the absolute risk is highest in early childhood (younger than five years of age). Pneumococcal infections in young asplenic children are mainly caused by the seven serotypes included in PCV7. These types remain important throughout childhood, but other types become increasingly prevalent after five years of age.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0230.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1030.041

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicAbdominal Trauma and InjuriesFrench-language works237,207