MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003788803 · doi:10.3345/kjp.2011.54.4.141

Recommendation for the use of newly introduced Tdap vaccine in Korea

2011· article· en· W2003788803 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kyong Min Choi, Kyung Hyo Kim, Yae‐Jean Kim, Jong‐Hyun Kim, Su Eun Park, Hoan Jong Lee, Byung Wook Eun, Dae Sun Jo, Eun Hwa Choi, Young Jin Hong

Bibliographic record

VenueKorean Journal of Pediatrics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePertussis vaccineIncidence (geometry)Whooping coughPediatricsFood and drug administrationBordetella pertussisVaccinationImmunologyImmunizationEnvironmental healthAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pertussis is an acute respiratory infection characterized by paroxysmal cough and inspiratory whoop for over 2 weeks. The incidence of pertussis has decreased markedly after the introduction of DTwP/DTaP vaccine, but the incidence of pertussis has increased steadily among young infant and among adolescents and adults in many countries. Td vaccine was used in this age group but the increase in pertussis has lead to the development of a Tdap vaccine. The Tdap vaccine is a Td vaccine with a pertussis vaccine added and is thought to decrease the incidence and transmission of pertussis in the respective age group. In Korea, two products are approved by the KOREA FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION, which are ADACEL™ (Sanofi-Pasteur, Totonto, Ontario, Canada) and BOOSTRIX® (GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium) for those aged between 11-64. This report summarizes the recommendations approved by the Committee on Infectious Diseases, the Korean Pediatric Society.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.008

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKorean Journal of PediatricsSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207