MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138683017

Burden of acute otitis media on Canadian families.

2011· article· en· W2138683017 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ève Dubé, Philippe De Wals, Vladimir Gîlca, Nicole Boulianne, Moussa Ouakki, France Lavoie, Richard Bradet

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOtitisAcute otitis mediaOutpatient visitsFamily medicineEmergency departmentPediatricsHealth carePsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the burden of acute otitis media (AOM) on Canadian families. DESIGN: Telephone survey using random-digit dialing. SETTING: All Canadian provinces between May and June 2008. PARTICIPANTS: Caregivers of 1 or more children aged 6 months to 5 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Caregivers' reports on the number of AOM episodes experienced by the child in the past 12 months, as well as disease characteristics, health services and medication use, time spent on medical consultations (including travel), and time taken off from work to care for the sick children. RESULTS: A total of 502 eligible caregivers were recruited, 161 (32%) of whom reported at least 1 AOM episode for their children and 42 (8%) of whom reported 3 or more episodes during the past 12 months. Most children (94%, 151 of 161) visited with health professionals during their most recent AOM episodes. The average time required for medical examination was 3.1 hours in an emergency department and 1.8 hours in an outpatient clinic. Overall, 93% of episodes resulted in antibiotics use. A substantial proportion of caregivers (38%) missed work during this time; the average time taken off work was 15.9 hours. CONCLUSION: In Canada, episodes of AOM are still associated with substantial use of health services and indirect costs to the caregivers.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations29
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicEar Surgery and Otitis MediaFrench-language works237,207