MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889280169 · doi:10.14745/ccdr.v40i03a04

A Survey of Pertussis Surveillance and Immunization Practices in Canada, 2012

2014· article· en· W2889280169 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Saaketh Desai, Tiffany Smith, H Deehan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanada Communicable Disease Report · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunizationEnvironmental healthMedicinePopulationOutbreakHealth careStandardizationRoutine immunizationEconomic growthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In 2012 there was an increase in the incidence of pertussis in the Americas. The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) made a number of recommendations to strengthen surveillance, investigate outbreaks, to measure adequacy and timeliness of immunizations within the population and monitor policies related to high risk individuals such as health care workers and pregnant women. OBJECTIVE: To review measures taken in Canada by provinces and territories to control and prevent pertussis spread. METHODS: A survey was developed based on PAHO recommendations and distributed through the Council of Chief Medical Officers of Health to all provinces and territories. RESULTS: All provinces participated in the survey. Strong surveillance is aided by consistent use of case definitions; most provinces use the national case definition. Outbreaks are investigated at the local/provincial level. Immunization coverage is not well captured but efforts are underway to improve monitoring through surveys and immunization registries. Policies have been implemented related to high risk individuals but evaluations of these policies have not been undertaken as of yet. CONCLUSION: Based on the PAHO recommendations, Canada is well poised to provide surveillance data on pertussis. There are gaps in surveillance, in standardization among jurisdictions and in immunization coverage data which may need to be addressed to gain a better understanding of the impact of pertussis in Canada.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanada Communicable Disease ReportSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207