MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1774683220 · doi:10.12968/bjom.2015.23.6.418

More needs to be done to prevent Group B strep infection in the UK

2015· article· en· W1774683220 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fiona McQuaid, Jane A. Plumb

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Midwifery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and Maternal Infections
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroup BSepsisMedicineColonisationStreptococcusMeningitisPediatricsAntibioticsStreptococcus agalactiaeIntensive care medicineNeonatal sepsisImmunologySurgeryBiologyColonizationMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Group B streptococcus (GBS) is the most common cause of sepsis and meningitis in infants under the age of 3 months with a 10% mortality and significant morbidity for many survivors. In the UK, over 40 babies die each year of GBS-related sepsis. Early-onset infection can be prevented in the majority of cases by giving women known to be colonised with GBS intravenous antibiotics during labour, but this requires a screening process which is not currently recommended in the UK. In many countries, including the USA, Canada and much of Europe, screening for GBS colonisation is part of routine antenatal care. This article aims to review the issues surrounding antenatal screening for GBS and argues that we could be doing much more in the UK to prevent this potentially devastating infection in newborn babies.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.004

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of MidwiferySame topicNeonatal and Maternal InfectionsFrench-language works237,207