Bibliographic record
Abstract
The benefits of vaccines for adults have been underappreciated because of the focus on childhood vaccines. However, precisely because of the success of immunization programs for children, most deaths from vaccine-preventable diseases now occur amongst adults. Tetanus boosters will help to maintain Canada's low tetanus rates and pertussis boosters for adults are now available. Human papilloma virus vaccine may be indicated in some older adults. Hepatitis A and B vaccines may be indicated if there is occupational, travel or lifestyle risk. Pneumococcal and zoster vaccines are recommended in those over 65 years of age, and all adults benefit from annual influenza vaccination. A systematic approach to immunizing adults would assist in ensuring that all who are eligible for specific vaccines are offered them. This approach would include promoting routine immunization as a fundamental part of every patient encounter and the use of tools, such as the Adult Immunization Questionnaire and the Adult Immunization Wallet Card. By investing in these strategies, the health of adults can be improved significantly.
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 | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.012 |
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".