Canadian Acute Respiratory Illness and Flu Scale (CARIFS) for Clinical Detection of Influenza in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Validated clinical scales, such as the Canadian Acute Respiratory Illness and Flu Scale (CARIFS), have not been used to differentiate influenza (FLU) from other respiratory viruses. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a prospective cohort presenting to the emergency department (ED) with an influenza-like infection from 2008 to 2010. Subjects were children aged 0 to 19 years who had a venipuncture and respiratory virus polymerase chain reaction. Demographics and CARIFS items were assessed during the ED visit; comparisons were made between FLU and non-FLU subjects. RESULTS: The 203 subjects had median age 30.5 months; 61.6% were male. Comorbid conditions (51.2%) were common. FLU was identified in 26.6%, and were older than non-FLU patients (69.7 vs 47.9 months, P = .02). Demographic, household factors, and mean CARIFS score did not differ between FLU (33.7), and non-FLU (32.0) (mean difference 1.6, 95% CI: -2.0 to 5.2) groups. CONCLUSIONS: CARIFS cannot discriminate between FLU and non-FLU infection in ED children with influenza-like infection.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".