MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1838336040 · doi:10.1164/rccm.2305012

Management of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome

2003· article· en· W1838336040 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kenneth W. Tsang, Wah Kit Lam

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOutbreakRibavirinIntensive care medicineMiddle East respiratory syndromePneumoniaAtypical pneumoniaDiseaseMainland ChinaPediatricsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ChinaInfectious disease (medical specialty)ImmunologyVirologyInternal medicineVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is a highly contagious and predominantly pneumonic illness caused by a novel coronavirus now commonly known as SARS-CoV (1, 2). Since its recognition in February 2003, SARS has spread to 30 countries and has affected over 8,000 people, resulting in almost 700 deaths worldwide (3). In Hong Kong, over 25% of the victims are health care workers, and the fear of this disease has created devastating socioeconomic effects in Hong Kong and worldwide. SARS is a severe and potentially progressive disease, and many patients progress to severe pneumonia and some even die with diffuse alveolar damage (4). Although it is increasingly being recognized that the mode of transmission is predominantly via droplets, it is now suspected that SARS could also be transmitted via fomites and contaminated sewage systems (5). Although the outbreak of SARS has triggered tremendous international research collaboration, which has enabled rapid dissemination of newly found knowledge to combat this frightening condition, there is very little published literature illustrating the experience of clinicians in the management of these patients. As the vast majority of cases occurred in Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, the mainland of China, and Toronto, physicians outside these areas have seldom had the opportunity to manage these patients (4, 6, 7). Although it is commonly agreed that SARS-CoV infection, being a viral illness, does not respond to antibiotic therapy, other treatment modalities are controversial (6, 8–11). In Hong Kong, a combination of corticosteroid and ribavirin, a broad-spectrum antiviral agent, is routinely used. The use of ribavirin has attracted considerable skepticism because it exhibits no in vitro efficacy against SARS-CoV and it is associated with considerable toxicities, including hemolytic anemia (10, 12, 13). Until we have an efficacious vaccine and implementation of effective epidemiologic infection control measures, and in the absence of effective anti-SARS-CoV agents in sight, SARS is likely to remain a major health threat to the world. In this article, we attempt to address the diagnostic and therapeutic experience regarding this new condition, and in doing so we hope our experience will assist clinicians in their encounter with this potentially devastating, poorly understood new disease.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations39
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207