MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952195587 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxz081

La toxicité du plomb sous un nouvel angle : l’exposition à de faibles doses de plomb chez les enfants canadiens

2019· article· fr· W2952195587 on OpenAlexaffabout
Irena Buka, C Hervouet-Zeiber

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy Metal Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsCanadian Paediatric Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les cas de toxicité du plomb aiguë ou subaiguë exigeant un traitement actif sont rares au Canada, mais il est important que les pédiatres connaissent les nouvelles données probantes reliant de faibles taux de plomb à des déficits neurodéveloppementaux. Selon Santé Canada, on constate un potentiel d’exposition pendant la période prénatale, chez les nourrissons et chez les tout-petits, attribuable à la présence de plomb dans la nourriture, l’eau, la poussière domestique, la terre et les produits portés à la bouche. Les enfants qui ont des troubles neurodéveloppementaux et qui habitent dans de vieux logements et les nouveaux arrivants au Canada seraient plus à risque. Les symptômes peuvent être latents, subtils et chroniques. Les dosages sanguins, largement disponibles en clinique, ne confirment pas le diagnostic, à moins d’une exposition récente. L’Enquête canadienne sur les mesures de la santé présente des données sur la biosurveillance humaine, et Santé Canada propose que les cliniciens utilisent ces nouvelles valeurs de référence. La détection précoce et la prévention de l’exposition au plomb sont d’importants objectifs de santé publique, en raison des effets chroniques et du traitement complexe de la toxicité du plomb.

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)0.002
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 score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicHeavy Metal Exposure and ToxicityFrench-language works237,207