MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096447903 · doi:10.1017/s0950268807009375

A common, symptom-based case definition for gastroenteritis

2007· article· en· W2096447903 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shannon E. Majowicz, G. HALL, Elaine Scallan, G. K. ADAK, Charmaine Gauci, Tyreek Jones, S. O’Brien, Olga L. Henao, Paul Sockett

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Infection · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComparabilityMedicineEpidemiologyIncidence (geometry)PediatricsPopulationDemographyEnvironmental healthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

National studies determining the burden of gastroenteritis have defined gastroenteritis by its clinical picture, using symptoms to classify cases and non-cases. The use of different case definitions has complicated inter-country comparisons. We selected four case definitions from the literature, applied these to population data from Australia, Canada, Ireland, Malta and the United States, and evaluated how the epidemiology of illness varied. Based on the results, we developed a standard case definition. The choice of case definition impacted on the observed incidence of gastroenteritis, with a 1.5-2.1 times difference between definitions in a given country. The proportion of cases with bloody diarrhoea, fever, and the proportion who sought medical care and submitted a stool sample also varied. The mean age of cases varied by <5 years under the four definitions. To ensure comparability of results between studies, we recommend a standard symptom-based case definition, and minimum set of results to be reported.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0120.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations105
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and InfectionSame topicViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiologyFrench-language works237,207