Bibliographic record
Abstract
Immunization against pertussis (whooping cough) has been part of the routine childhood immunization program for over 50 years. Until 1997, a whole cell pertussis vaccine was used, most often combined with diphtheria and tetanus toxoids; in some jurisdictions it was combined with inactivated poliovirus vaccine and later with Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)‐conjugate vaccine. Vaccine doses were given at two, four, six and 18 months of age, and again at four to six years of age. Use of the whole cell vaccine in children seven years of age and older was not recommended because "the incidence and severity of the disease greatly decrease with age, and because adverse reactions are (may be) more common in older children and adults…" (1‐3). Over a one‐year period in 1997/98, all provinces in Canada began using an acellular pertussis vaccine, again combined with diphtheria and tetanus toxoids, inactivated poliovirus vaccine and Hib‐conjugate vaccine. In 1999, an acellular pertussis vaccine that was combined with tetanus and diphtheria toxoids (TdaP) (Adacel, Aventis Pasteur, Canada) was licensed for use in individuals 12 to 54 years of age in Canada. In Germany, a similar adolescent and adult TdaP was licensed in 2000 (Boostrix, SmithKline Beecham, Belgium). With the availability of a TdaP product in Canada, should routine universal immunization against pertussis be provided for all adolescents and adults? Some of the key issues to be considered when answering this question are addressed in the questions and answers that follow. The focus of the present paper is on the adolescent population; however, similar issues about adult immunization need to be addressed by internal medicine and family practice practitioners.
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.009 |
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".