MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1563180635 · doi:10.1093/pch/9.3.159

Regional paediatric asthma centre: An intervention model

2004· article· en· W1563180635 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
W H Smith, K Downey, B Frampton, Angela Collings, Janice Fletcher

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaMultidisciplinary approachEmergency departmentEmergency medicinePediatricsIntervention (counseling)Medical emergencyNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary paediatric asthma clinic in reducing the morbidity associated with paediatric asthma. METHODS: An initial survey of need was undertaken in the community of Orillia, Ontario and the surrounding area. The clinic was established as a separate entity from the adult model. The multidisciplinary nature of the clinic was a priority. The effectiveness of the clinic was assessed with patient/parent reports and objectively analyzed by assessing the frequency of asthma visits to the emergency room and hospital admissions. RESULTS: Comparison was undertaken between the first year and third year of clinic operation. The number of paediatric asthma visits to the emergency room was reduced by 20%. The number of paediatric asthma inpatient visits was reduced by 12%. At the same time, the number of paediatric asthma visits to the asthma clinic increased by 200%. CONCLUSIONS: This multidiscipline paediatric asthma clinic model is community friendly and reduces the morbidity of asthma as evidenced by declining visits to the emergency room.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicAsthma and respiratory diseases→French-language works237,207→