MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2764048199 · doi:10.2807/esw.07.14.02196-en

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome: international update

2003· article· en· W2764048199 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Horby, A Nicoll

Bibliographic record

VenueWeekly releases (1997–2007) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaBeijingCase fatality rateGeographySocioeconomicsDemographyTransmission (telecommunications)MedicineEnvironmental healthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As of 2 April 2003, 2223 cases of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and 78 deaths have been reported to the World Health Organization (WHO), a case fatality rate of 3.5% (http://www.who.int/csr/sarscountry/2003_04_02/en/). This is an increase of four to fivefold in the global totals in the last seven days (http://www.who.int/csr/sarscountry/2003_03_25/en/) with the greatest proportionate and absolute increases being in China (Hong Kong and Guangdong Province), and to a much lesser extent in Canada. There has been little absolute rise in other country totals. Eighteen countries have now reported cases but in most of these no transmission seems to have occurred. Local transmission has occurred in Hanoi (Vietnam), Singapore, Toronto (Canada), Taiwan, and the following parts of China: Guangdong Province; Beijing; Shanxi; and the special administrative region of Hong Kong. In the United Kingdom three probable SARS cases have been reported; all have now recovered. Indeed, the only areas where WHO feels there is evidence consistent with current transmission are Hong Kong and Guangdong (http://www.who.int/csr/sarsarchive/2003_02_02b/en/), and the WHO has issued advice to international travellers not to travel to or through either area.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWeekly releases (1997–2007)Same topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207