Burden of Chickenpox on Families: A Study in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the nonhospital costs of treating chickenpox and to ascertain the opinion of parents regarding the usefulness of vaccination. DESIGN: Retrospective postal survey. SETTING: Province of Quebec. PARTICIPANTS: Random sample of 3333 families with children aged six months to 12 years. OUTCOME MEASURES: For cases of chickenpox that occurred between September 1, 1997 and August 31, 1998, the use of health services, time away from school or work, patient care required, direct and indirect costs for the families and the health care system, and the opinion of parents regarding chickenpox and the vaccine were evaluated. RESULTS: The response rate was 64.7%, and 18.8% of households reported a history of chickenpox, a total of 693 cases. A physician was consulted in 45.8% of these cases, and medication was used in 91.7%. The frequency of hospitalizations was 0.6%. Time away from work or school caused by the disease was 4.1 days on average, with 46.5% of absences being attributed to the risk of contagion. The total average cost of a case of chickenpox was $225. Direct expenses for households accounted for 11% of the total cost, public sector direct costs 7%, indirect costs related to absence from work 38% and caregiving time 45%. A majority of parents (70%) were in favour of a systematic childhood immunization program. CONCLUSIONS: Chickenpox without complications is disruptive for families, but the direct costs for families and the public sector are relatively small.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".