MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323581590

population that is susceptible) can diff er according to population demographic structure.

2014· article· en· W2323581590 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David N. Fisman, GM Leung, Marc Lipsitch, Dalla Lana

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicData-Driven Disease Surveillance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationDemographyPandemicCluster (spacecraft)Population structureIndigenousAge structureBiologyGeographyInfectious disease (medical specialty)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineDiseaseEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10 The 2009 infl uenza A (H1N1) virus had strikingly diff erent reproductive numbers, and thus very diff erent eff ects, in Indigenous Canadian populations and the general population of southern Canada. This diff erence might have resulted from diff erential crowding and a younger age distribution (those born before 1957 seem to have been protected against infection) in isolated First Nations reservations. 11 If the mean value of R0 is fi xed, heterogeneity caused by diff erences between individuals in one setting (eg, superspreaders 5 ) or by diff erences between settings (hospital vs community) both increase variation in cluster size and reduce the probability that any particular individual infection will cause an epidemic. 4 Pandemic risk estimates based on early, scarce information should be interpreted with caution, because the identifi cation of highly infectious individuals and severe cases is more likely, and because of the greater availability of surveillance resources in high-income populations where transmission characteristics of patho gens might be atypical. 12

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.256 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData-Driven Disease SurveillanceFrench-language works237,207