Parents of young children used over the counter medication to alleviate symptoms and to change children’s behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Allotey P, Reidpath DD, Elisha D. “Social medication” and the control of children: a qualitative study of over-the-counter medication among Australian children. Pediatrics 2004;114:e378–83.[OpenUrl][1][Abstract/FREE Full Text][2] Q What are the individual and contextual factors and the social processes that support the use of over the counter (OTC) medication in children? Qualitative study. Australia. 40 parents (38 mothers plus 2 partners) who were primary caregivers of children <5 years of age, were mostly middle class, and were in a relationship. 75% of parents had >1 child, and >50% worked or studied part time. Semistructured interviews were used to collect demographic data. Unstructured interviews (duration 2 h) were used to elicit information about the most recent occasion when an OTC medication was given, including details about the course of illness (when applicable), identified symptoms, and contextual factors surrounding OTC medication use. Vitamin or supplement use was not … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DPediatrics%26rft.stitle%253DPediatrics%26rft.aulast%253DAllotey%26rft.auinit1%253DP.%26rft.volume%253D114%26rft.issue%253D3%26rft.spage%253De378%26rft.epage%253De383%26rft.atitle%253D%2522Social%2BMedication%2522%2Band%2Bthe%2BControl%2Bof%2BChildren%253A%2BA%2BQualitative%2BStudy%2Bof%2BOver-the-Counter%2BMedication%2BAmong%2BAustralian%2BChildren%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1542%252Fpeds.2004-0759%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F15342901%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/ijlink?linkType=ABST&journalCode=pediatrics&resid=114/3/e378&atom=%2Febnurs%2F8%2F3%2F91.atom
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".