MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890578942 · doi:10.12968/joan.2018.7.7.352

Infection control in aesthetic medicine and the consequences of inaction

2018· article· en· W2890578942 on OpenAlexaff
Helena Collier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aesthetic Nursing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Imaging in Medicine
Canadian institutionsSKiN Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsepsisHuman medicineMedicineMicrobiologyIntensive care medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microbiology is the study of microbes—living organisms so small they can only be seen through a microscope. They are considered the smallest form of life and include bacteria, viruses, fungi, archaea and protozoa. Microbes that can cause disease are referred to as pathogens. The relationship between the human body and the microbial world is dynamic; however, despite this lifelong partnership and the undeniable value these organisms bring to both the human body and the earth's ecology, some pathogens are capable of destroying human life. The skin and mucous membranes are the body's protective barriers and if they are breached by pathogens, they can reach subcutaneous tissue, muscle, bone and body cavities. In the field of aesthetic medicine, the injection of a dermal filler into the soft tissues is one of the most sought after treatments. This procedure can incorporate multiple injection passes from skin to bone. There is therefore a risk of an infectious complication arising if all traces of make-up are not removed and the skin disinfected, if there is inadequate hand antisepsis or environmental disinfection, and if aseptic technique is not executed during the delivery of these injections.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.013
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.308 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aesthetic NursingSame topicDigital Imaging in MedicineFrench-language works237,207