Respiratory illness in children attending daycare
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Daycare attendance has been associated with an increased occurrence of respiratory illness, but little is known about which children are at particular risk. Our objectives were to determine the association between the incidence of respiratory illness and attendance in daycare, and to determine if the risk is modified by selected sociodemographic factors. Using a prospective study design, 185 newborns in Prince Edward Island, Canada, were recruited between January 1997-March 2000. They were followed for 2 years or until the end-date of the study in September 2000. Information on daycare attendance and respiratory illness was collected twice monthly by telephone interviews of the parent. Comparing those who were ever in daycare more than 1 day per week (daycare group) to those who were not, the association between daycare and illness was stronger among children 15 months of age compared to those less than 3 months of age (P < 0.001), and stronger among those without siblings than those with siblings (P < 0.001). Among those not in daycare, family income was inversely related to the proportion of days with an illness episode: 9.8% (CI, 6.0, 13.6) if family income was < $30,000 vs. 5.2% (CI, 4.1, 6.3) if > or = $30,000 (P = 0.003). However, in the daycare group, income did not influence illness, with respective values of 14.6% (CI, 12.4, 16.8) vs. 13.2% (CI, 12.1, 14.3) (P = 0.21). In conclusion, younger children and those with siblings may be less susceptible to illness associated with daycare, and daycare attendance may negate a protective effect of higher income on respiratory illness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".