MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014630390 · doi:10.1542/pir.22-2-39

Infectious Diseases in Schools and Child Care Facilities

2001· review· en· W2014630390 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joan Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatrics in Review · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPediatric health and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFamily medicinePediatricsMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. Joan Robinson, MD* 1. 2. *Clinical Associate Professor, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Objectives After completing this article, readers should be able to: 1. Compare the incidence of infections between preschool children who attend child care centers and those who are cared for in their own homes. 2. Delineate illness exclusion criteria for children attending a child care facility. 3. Describe the potential relationship between cytomegalovirus infection among children cared for in a child care facility and congenital cytomegalovirus infection. 4. Determine when transmission of human immunodeficiency virus or hepatitis C may be a problem in child care facilities or schools. Management of infectious diseases in schools and child care centers is becoming increasingly complex. The emergence of penicillin-resistant pneumococci (PRP) means that oral antibiotic treatment of common bacterial infections acquired in schools or child care facilities may be less successful in the future. The etiology of many rashes, fevers, and respiratory tract diseases now can be determined with relatively noninvasive procedures. If other children attending the same school or child care center have the same diagnosis, it is evident that a child probably acquired an infection such as parvovirus, influenza, or respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in these facilities. Accordingly, issues related to infection control in these settings are of greater interest to parents and staff than in the past. Furthermore, because of immunization programs, serious infections are now less common in children, which has made parents less tolerant of their children acquiring these infections outside the home. Until the 1960s, the vast majority of preschool children were cared for in their own homes, initially entering a group setting at age 5 or 6 years, when they started school. Now, most preschoolers are exposed to large numbers of other children in a closed setting several days per week when they enter a child care facility. Child care facilities for preschoolers can be:

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.383 · 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

Citations29
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatrics in ReviewSame topicPediatric health and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207