MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029980784 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e3181d10522

Practical lessons from the first outbreaks: Clinical presentation, obstacles, and management strategies for severe pandemic (pH1N1) 2009 influenza pneumonitis

2010· article· en· W2029980784 on OpenAlexaffabout
Duane J. Funk, Faisal Siddiqui, Kim Wiebe, Russ R. Miller, Edgar Bautista, Edgar Jiménez, Kimberley Webster

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePandemicPresentation (obstetrics)OutbreakCapital cityIntensive careDiseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Intensive care medicineVirologyGeographyPathologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the initial spring wave of novel influenza pH1N1 (2009), several North American cities experienced localized epidemics that served as a harbinger of the larger second Fall wave of infection. The city of Winnipeg, the capital of the province of Manitoba in central Canada, was one of the first in North America to deal with a rapid presentation of large numbers of patients requiring critical care services resulting from pandemic (pH1N1) 2009 influenza-associated respiratory failure. Mexico City, Orlando, FL, and Salt Lake City, UT, were other Northern Hemisphere sites of heavy disease activity during the spring wave of the pandemic. This article is written in a narrative format that allows the reader to understand the problems (both major and mundane, anticipated and unexpected) experienced by healthcare workers in these sites during this pandemic. Descriptions cover a range of issues and difficulties that caused significant stress to the operations of intensive care units in these cities. We hope to offer some insight into potential pitfalls and problems that may be experienced by other centers and provide some potential approaches to addressing these issues.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207