Book Reviews: Bioterrorism: guidelines for medical and public health management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Donald A. Henderson, Thomas V. Inglesby, Tara O'Toole, editors Chicago: American Medical Association; 2002. 256 pp. US$29.95 ISBN 1-57947-280-X Rating: **** Audience: Medical and public health practitioners. Content: The beginning of the book includes a series of articles summarizing the clinical cases of anthrax that occurred in the United States in the fall of 2001. It proceeds with separate chapters for each of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Class A agents of bioterrorism (anthrax, smallpox, the plague, botulinum toxin, tularemia and hemorrhagic fever viruses). The focus is on their use as biological weapons. These chapters lead to discussions of consensus statements from the US Working Group on Civilian Biodefence. The topic of large-scale quarantine concludes the book. Strengths: Bioterrorism: guidelines for medical and public health management, written by recognized experts, is concise, direct, reader-friendly and stimulating. The information presented is the product of an evidence-gathering process and expert opinion. By bringing together the most recent information on clinical features, diagnosis, pathogenesis, epidemiology, infection control, decontamination and treatment, it will satisfy both attending physicians and public health practitioners. It is a reasonable book that honestly discusses the difficulties of diagnosis and management. The writers provide ample information without overburdening the reader. Illustrations and tables are used effectively. This excellent book provides readers with an easily accessible wealth of information on bioterrorism. Limitations: Bioterrorism is an ever-changing topic. The authors are well aware of this and emphasize that “the conclusions and recommendations need to be regularly re-assessed as new information becomes available.” Discussions on research needs may be insufficient for researchers, but do sufficiently provide general knowledge, which is likely the intention. A chapter summarizing the non-Class A agents would be useful. The book is written in the American context, and therefore Canadian public health approaches may differ. Marc-Andre Beaulieu Neurologist, Ottawa Hospital Assistant Professor, University of Ottawa Senior Medical Advisor, Bioterrorism, Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, Health Canada Ottawa, Ont. The opinions expressed are those of the reviewer and do not necessarily reflect official Health Canada policy. This book is available through your local book retailer or through the publisher at www.ama-assn .org/ama/pub/article/8183-6790.html
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.083 | 0.112 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".