MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108272147 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2012.301158

Mortality and Morbidity Among Military Personnel and Civilians During the 1930s and World War II From Transmission of Hepatitis During Yellow Fever Vaccination: Systematic Review

2013· review· en· W2108272147 on OpenAlexafffund
Roger E. Thomas, Diane Lorenzetti, Wendy Spragins

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis Viruses Studies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health Services
FundersNational Archives of AustraliaWellcome TrustUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsTransmission (telecommunications)MedicineVaccinationEpidemiologyVirologyHepatitisHepatitis A vaccineEnvironmental healthHepatitis AHepatitis BFamily medicineImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During World War II, nearly all US and Allied troops received yellow fever vaccine. Until May 1942, it was both grown and suspended in human serum. In April 1942, major epidemics of hepatitis occurred in US and Allied troops who had received yellow fever vaccine. A rapid and thorough investigation by the US surgeon general followed, and a directive was issued discontinuing the use of human serum in vaccine production. The large number of cases of hepatitis caused by the administration of this vaccine could have been avoided. Had authorities undertaken a thorough review of the literature, they would have discovered published reports, as early as 1885, of postvaccination epidemics of hepatitis in both men and horses. It would take 4 additional decades of experiments and epidemiological research before viruses of hepatitis A, B, C, D, and E were identified, their modes of transmission understood, and their genomes sequenced.

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)0.001
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicHepatitis Viruses Studies and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207