MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012496191 · doi:10.1055/s-0031-1283280

H1N1 Influenza: Critical Care Aspects

2011· review· en· W2012496191 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Glen Westall, Miranda Paraskeva

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicMedicinePublic healthOutbreakHuman mortality from H5N1WorkloadHealth careIntensive careInfluenza A virusInfluenza pandemicEnvironmental healthIntensive care medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)VirusDiseaseVirologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)NursingEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the Northern Hemisphere spring of 2009, a novel H1N1 influenza A virus emerged in Mexico, causing widespread human infection and acute critical respiratory illness. The 2009 H1N1 virus spread initially to the United States and Canada, with subsequent rapid global dissemination, leading the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare "a public health emergency of international concern" in April 2009, and upgrading the viral threat to pandemic status in June 2009. Despite initial fears, the severity of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic overall did not differ significantly from that of seasonal influenza. However, the demographics of those at risk of severe illness did differ (affecting children and young adults, rather than the very young and the very old). The 2009 H1N1 pandemic led to rapid implementation of health care initiatives, including the provision of critical care services, to limit the effect of the influenza outbreak on the community. This review focuses on the critical care response to the H1N1 pandemic and examines whether the implementation of critical care services as planned a priori matched the reality of the clinical workload and the patient burden that transpired during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic.

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)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207