Retour d’expérience des médecins généralistes deux ans après l’épidémie de chikungunya de 2005–2006 à La Réunion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primary care practitioners constitute key stakeholders in the surveillance and control of epidemic-prone infectious diseases. We carried out a survey in Reunion Island two years after the 2006 chikungunya epidemic using a purposive random sample of 100 general practitioners (GP). The objective was to describe and identity factors associated to GP involvement in case notification during the 2006 chikungunya epidemic. The methods were: administered face-to-face questionnaire and identification of notification determinants by univariate and multivariate analyses. Nearly 60% of participants declared having failed to join the case notification procedure. The main impeding factor was the acknowledgment of limited capacities consecutive to massive influx of patients. Inversely, practicing in group organization tended to show a favorable effect on case notification. In addition, most responders reported the relevance of the information provided by health authorities, despite a perceived limited efficacy of the procedure in the field. Primary care practitioners' involvement in the surveillance of epidemic infectious diseases requires to be reinforced by a preestablished partnership within a proactive network. This goal comprehends relevant training and preparation for epidemic surveillance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".