Bibliographic record
Abstract
News media announced a global resurgence of whooping cough in April this year following a session on pertussis at the 12th European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases in Milan, Italy. Subsequently the European Union sent an alert to member states. Pertussis is one of the top causes of vaccine preventable deaths, with nearly 300 000 deaths in children worldwide in 2000.1 However, reports of a global resurgence originated in countries with low mortality and high vaccination coverage. For such countries the issue is how to fine tune effective immunisation programmes. In the rest of the world, priorities are to decrease infant mortality by improving coverage and timeliness of vaccination and implementing pertussis surveillance.2 Pertussis has re-emerged in low mortality countries in the past because of low coverage after a vaccine scare in the 1980s (in the United Kingdom) or the use of vaccines with poor efficacy (Canada, Sweden).3 Sweden and Germany stopped their vaccination programmes completely and only reinstituted vaccination for pertussis after years of recurrent epidemics of whooping cough. More recently …
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 | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
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".