MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985164101 · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(19)30618-8

Rethinking the population attributable fraction for infectious diseases

2019· article· en· W2985164101 on OpenAlexaff
Sharmistha Mishra, Stefan Baral

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Infectious Diseases · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttributable riskPopulationEpidemiologyPublic healthDemographyMedicineScopusMEDLINEEnvironmental healthInternal medicineBiologyPathologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The population attributable fraction (PAF) is commonly used in public health to signal the contribution, or importance, of a risk factor to a health outcome. The PAF poses the counterfactual:1 what would happen if the considered risk factor was entirely absent from the population? In The Lancet Infectious Diseases, Katharine Looker and colleagues2 estimated that globally, in 2016, 29·6% (95% uncertainty interval 22·9–37·1) of new HIV infections acquired via sexual transmission were attributable to herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) infection.

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)0.223
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.564
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2230.564
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.006
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.017
Open science0.0080.008
Research integrity0.0080.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.307 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Infectious DiseasesSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207