A Pan-Canadian Narrative Review on the Protocols for COVID-19 and Canadian Emergency Departments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First described in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, The World Health Organization declared the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) a global pandemic on March 11th, 2020. Canada identified its first positive COVID-19 patient on January 25th, 2020. The Canadian government and heath care system immediately started discussing how best to respond to this pandemic. It was hypothesized that potentially positive and confirmed positive COVID-19 patients would present to emergency departments across the country. It has now been over a year since the first positive patient was identified in Canada, and there has yet to be a narrative review that explores how Canadian emergency departments have responded to the novel COVID-19 virus. This narrative review will discuss measures that were taken thus far, including pre-hospital care, the use and implementation of virtual care, the importance of simulation training, protocols regarding patient screening at presentation to the emergency department, the use of personal protective equipment, and lastly rural emergency department response. This narrative review may be beneficial as the COVID-19 pandemic continues, by providing a concise summary of measures that were taken in various emergency departments across Canada to prevent the spread of the virus.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".