MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010888687 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.060819

Cervical cancer vaccine may come soon to Canada

2006· article· en· W2010888687 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Andrew N. Priest

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransmission (telecommunications)ChinaMedicineCluster (spacecraft)PneumoniaEtiologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Cervical cancerCoronavirusOutbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Disease controlEpidemiologyDemographyFamily medicineCancerVirologyPediatricsDiseaseGeographyInternal medicineTelecommunicationsInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In late December 2019, Chinese authorities reported a cluster of pneumonia cases of unknown aetiology in Wuhan, China1. A novel strain of coronavirus named Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was isolated and identified on 2 January 2020 2. Human-to-human transmission have been confirmed by a study of a family cluster and have occurred in health-care workers 3,4. Until 10 February 2020, 42638 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have been confirmed in China, of which 31728 came from Hubei Province (Figure). Wenzhou, as a southeast coastal city with the most cases outside Hubei Province, its policy control and epidemic projections have certain references for national and worldwide epidemic prevention and control. We described the epidemiologic characteristics of COVID-19 in Wenzhou and made a transmission model to predict the expected number of cases in the coming days.

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)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1480.019

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207