MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2206349043 · doi:10.1155/2001/919830

Historical Review of Croup

2001· article· en· W2206349043 on OpenAlexaff
Victor Marchessault

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOtolaryngology and Infectious Diseases
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCroupShowerMistMedical emergencyTracheotomyMedicinePediatricsSurgeryGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the 1960s, managing croup was simple ‐ put the child in the bathroom and run a hot shower. In most cases, the child′s symptoms would be controlled. When the mist from the shower failed to control the croup, the parents would take the child to an emergency room. Often, the child would get better on the way to the hospital, thanks to the cool, outside air. At the hospital, a ′croupette′ would be available for some children, and the health care providers hoped that the children would remain quiet in the strange tent filled with cold mist. Some hospitals even had special croup rooms where steam was piped in, and the whole room was filled with cold mist. Needless to say, nursing staff were not eager to work in these rooms. The last resort of treatment was a tracheotomy because the art of intubation had not yet been mastered. Two randomized studies failed to show the benefit of cool mist, and, today, it is rarely used (1,2).

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.006

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical MicrobiologySame topicOtolaryngology and Infectious DiseasesFrench-language works237,207