36: Characteristics and Risk Profiles of Paediatric International Travelers Visiting Friends and Relatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International travelers are susceptible to a wide spectrum of travel related morbidities. Paediatric travelers, along with travelers visiting friends and relatives (VFR) are both recognized high-risk groups. Despite the rising number of paediatric VFR travelers, their characteristics and risk profiles are not well described. To describe the risk-determining demographic and travel characteristics of paediatric international travelers. A descriptive analysis was conducted on pre-travel consultations completed between January 2013 and May 2014 at a Tertiary Care Family Travel Medicine Clinic. Data on demographics and travel characteristics were extracted from 312 consultations that met the inclusion criteria. 50% of consultations were for children <18 years of age (n=156), of which 31% were for young children (<5 years of age). We compared putative factors between VFRs and non-VFRs among children only. VFR children were on average significantly younger than non-VFR children (mean±SD: 5.4±4.1 vs 10.6±5.2 years of age, P<0.01). They were more likely to visit destinations in Asia (48% vs 29%, P<0.05), travel for longer duration (median (IQR): 31 (21–59) vs 12 (10–21) days, P<0.01), and stay with locals, friends and/or relatives (81% vs 13%, P<0.01). They were less likely to visit destinations in the Caribbean (0% vs 20%, P<0.05), participate in organized tour groups (4% vs 66%, P<0.01) and stay in hotel accommodations (41% vs 74%, P<0.01). See selected results in Table 1. VFR children traveling internationally are on average younger, more likely to travel for longer duration, and stay with locals, friends and/or relatives. They are potentially more susceptible to travel-related morbidities due to their young age and high-risk travel characteristics. These findings can help develop targeted pre-travel care for VFR children traveling internationally.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".