MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2763588168 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxx086.046

EBOLA VIRUS DISEASE: WHAT DO PHYSICIANS KNOW AND ARE THEY WILLING TO PROVIDE CARE?

2017· article· en· W2763588168 on OpenAlexaffabout
Steven Yeh

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEbola virusFamily medicineHealth careOutbreakCase fatality rateDemographicsMedical emergencyEmergency medicineEnvironmental healthPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ebola virus disease (EVD) is a rare disease with a high fatality rate. Outbreaks of Ebola are primarily confined to the African continent. The largest outbreak of EVD ever documented began in West Africa in 2014, and spread to multiple continents through returning infected healthcare workers. This raised questions regarding the readiness of healthcare workers in Canada to safely and willingly provide care to suspected or confirmed patients with EVD. Locally, physicians had undergone training to manage patients with suspected or confirmed EVD. OBJECTIVES: To identify physicians’ knowledge level, attitudes, and willingness to care for patients with suspected or confirmed EVD, and to evaluate the association between knowledge and confidence on willingness to provide care. DESIGN/METHODS: A cross-sectional, anonymous, online survey was emailed to 329 frontline physicians across 5 acute care hospitals in a Canadian city from June to October 2015. The survey measured physician demographics, knowledge regarding EVD, confidence, and willingness to provide care to patients with suspected or confirmed EVD. Ethics approval was provided by the University Research Ethics Board. RESULTS: Surveys were sent to 329 physicians with a response rate of 33% (n=108). A large proportion of respondents were adult emergency physicians (40%). Pediatricians comprised 40% of respondents including emergency physicians (19%), hospital pediatrics (14%), intensive care (5%), and infectious diseases (2%). Of the respondents, 76% had received Ebola training at a local hospital. Physicians reported their main source of information about EVD was from news articles (90%), physician colleagues (86%), and Ebola training (83%). Knowledge about EVD was not significantly associated with willingness to provide care. Willingness to provide care was strongly associated with self-reported confidence in providing care (OR=6.9, p<0.05) and self-reported agreement that appropriate training and precautions were provided (OR=3.3, p=0.013). The majority of physicians (82.8%) believed that more practice donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE) would increase confidence in providing direct care. CONCLUSION: Ensuring physicians are provided appropriate training and precautions to provide direct care to patients may ensure greater willingness to provide care. Training for physicians should include adequate practice with PPE, which may increase confidence in providing care.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicViral Infections and Outbreaks Research→French-language works237,207→