MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124414965 · doi:10.1177/1740774520984860

Reopening schools safely in the face of COVID-19: Can cluster randomized trials help?

2021· article· en· W3124414965 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles Weijer, Karla Hemming, Spencer Phillips Hey, Holly Fernandez Lynch

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Trials · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicRandomized controlled trialFace (sociological concept)Cluster (spacecraft)Medicine2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Medical educationResource (disambiguation)Cluster randomised controlled trialClinical trialPublic relationsPolitical scienceSociologyDiseaseComputer scienceSocial scienceVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the challenges of evidence-based health policymaking, as critical precautionary decisions, such as school closures, had to be made urgently on the basis of little evidence. As primary and secondary schools once again close in the face of surging infections, there is an opportunity to rigorously study their reopening. School-aged children appear to be less affected by COVID-19 than adults, yet schools may drive community transmission of the virus. Given the impact of school closures on both education and the economy, schools cannot remain closed indefinitely. But when and how can they be reopened safely? We argue that a cluster randomized trial is a rigorous and ethical way to resolve these uncertainties. We discuss key scientific, ethical, and resource considerations both to inform trial design of school reopenings and to prompt discussion of the merits and feasibility of conducting such a trial.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.418
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.979
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score0.763

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4180.979
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.818
GPT teacher head0.634
Teacher spread0.183 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical TrialsSame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207