MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156395065 · doi:10.1177/1757177411402409

Hospital acquired rotavirus infections: burden in Canadian paediatric hospitals

2011· article· en· W2156395065 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nicole Le Saux, Julie A. Bettinger, Scott A. Halperin, Wendy Vaudry, David W. Scheifele

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Infection Prevention · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie UniversityBC Children's HospitalStollery Children's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersMerck CanadaPublic Health Agency of CanadaGlaxoSmithKlineImpact Fund
KeywordsMedicineRotavirusEpidemiologyRotavirus InfectionsPediatricsIncidence (geometry)Rotavirus vaccineVaccinationEmergency medicinePediatric hospitalHospital admissionDiarrheaVirologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rotavirus infections are one of the most common hospital acquired infections in pediatric hospitals. Laboratory confirmed hospital acquired rotavirus infections from 12 pediatric hospitals in Canada were documented for a 3 year period, 2005-7. Overall, hospital acquired infections represented one quarter of all rotavirus hospitalizations for an annual rate of 0.45 per 1000 hospital days with a peak of 0.68 per 1,000 hospital days between December and May. Approximately 8% developed symptoms <72 hours after hospital discharge and required admission to hospital for management of rotavirus infection. Sixty percent of cases were less than 1 year of age and 75% had underlying medical illnesses. Given the licensure and increasing use of rotavirus vaccines, baseline data on the incidence and epidemiology of hospital acquired rotavirus infections will be useful in order to determine the potential impact of vaccination on hospital acquired rotavirus.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Infection PreventionSame topicViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiologyFrench-language works237,207