MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104604683 · doi:10.1086/422454

Fever after Immunization: Current Concepts and Improved Future Scientific Understanding

2004· review· en· W2104604683 on OpenAlexaff
Katrin Kohl, S. Michael Marcy, Michael D. Blum, Michael C. Jones, Ron Dagan, John Hansen, David R. Nalin, E Rothstein

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsMedicineImmunizationCurrent (fluid)Intensive care medicineImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fever is a common clinical complaint in adults and children with a variety of infectious illnesses, as well as a frequently reported adverse event following immunization. Although the level of measured temperature indicative of a "fever" was first defined in 1868, it remains unclear what role fever has as a physiologic reaction to invading substances, how best to measure body temperature and compare measurements from different body sites, and, consequently, how to interpret fever data derived from vaccine safety trials or immunization safety surveillance. However, even with many aspects of the societal, medical, economic, and epidemiologic meanings of fever as an adverse event following immunization (AEFI) still elusive, it is a generally benign--albeit common--clinical sign. By standardizing the definition and means of assessment of fever in vaccine safety studies, thereby permitting comparability of data, we hope to arrive at an improved understanding of its importance as an AEFI.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.010
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Citations71
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207