Bibliographic record
Abstract
On April 23rd 2009, health authorities in Mexico informed that a new virus was causing an increasing number of severe pneumonia cases in adults with unusually high mortality. After three weeks of intensive clinical and epidemiological research, a new influenza virus was identified as the unknown pathogen in most of the clinical samples sent by Mexico to labs in Winnipeg and Atlanta. The WHO was notified on the night of the 22nd, as soon as the information on etiology was available. At the same time, strict distancing measures were initiated in Mexico City and its suburbs; schools were closed and noncritical activities suspended. The problem was first evident at the Emergency Room of the National Institute of Respiratory Diseases, and confirmed by simultaneous reports received from San Luis Potosi and Oaxaca. We focused our analysis on cases with severe viral pneumonia and thus overestimated the mortality of the virus during the first weeks of the outbreak – the full picture was apparent only afterwards. The initial response was timely as oseltamivir, educational materials, and protective medical equipment were ready to be sent thanks to Mexico's national preparedness plan for a pandemic. 1340 cases fulfilled the case definition during the first month. Mexico's strict social distancing measures had a significant impact on the number of cases but were later relaxed. The epidemic curve shows a sharp increase, followed by a decrease in the number of cases, with growth during June and July due to a high number of cases in the southeast region. More recently, another wave of increased transmission was present in the metropolitan area. A significant feature of this outbreak has been the increased mortality in patients between 15 and 55 years old, some previously healthy, with no increase in the young and the old population. Pregnancy and obesity have also been identified as risk factors for severity. Previous immunity probably plays a role in the severity related to age. Many lessons should be learned from this epidemic: Collaboration, preparedness, transparency, and the importance of being alert towards the unexpected. Abstracts for SupplementInternational Journal of Infectious DiseasesVol. 14Preview Full-Text PDF Open Archive
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".