MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804778338 · doi:10.1186/s13054-018-2011-3

Promoting and sustaining a historical and global effort to prevent sepsis: the 2018 World Health Organization SAVE LIVES: Clean Your Hands campaign

2018· editorial· en· W2804778338 on OpenAlexaff
Romain Martischang, Daniela Pires, Sarah Masson-Roy, Hiroki Saito, Didier Pittet

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2018
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNosocomial Infections in ICU
Canadian institutionsCégep de Lévis
FundersFaculté de Médecine, Université de GenèveSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaUniversité de GenèveWorld Health OrganizationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMedicineHygieneSepsisHealth careSurviving Sepsis CampaignGlobal healthPublic healthIntensive care medicineMedical emergencyEnvironmental healthNursingEconomic growthSevere sepsisImmunologyPathologySeptic shock

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sepsis is estimated to affect more than 30 million patients with potentially five million deaths every year worldwide. Prevention of sepsis, as well as early recognition, diagnosis and treatment, can't be overlooked to mitigate this global public health threat. World Health Organization (WHO) promotes hand hygiene in health care through its annual global campaign, SAVE LIVES: Clean Your Hands campaign on 5 May every year. The 2018 campaign targets sepsis with the overall theme "It's in your hands; prevent sepsis in health 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0190.031
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.013

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicNosocomial Infections in ICUFrench-language works237,207