MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177880373 · doi:10.2298/stnv2101017j

COVID-19 and excess mortality: Was it possible to lower the number of deaths in Slovenia?

2021· article· en· W3177880373 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Damir Josipovič

Bibliographic record

VenueStanovnistvo · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJavna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RS
KeywordsExcess mortalityCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DemographyQuarter (Canadian coin)PopulationMortality rateSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Medicine2019-20 coronavirus outbreakGeographyDiseaseVirologyInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)Outbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents new data on the age structure of hospitalised SARI (severe acute respiratory infection) patients, with or without COVID-19, broken down by gender, place of infection, and region. The leading hypothesis that COVID-19 deaths are overestimated despite the high share of excess deaths was confirmed, bringing to light the important issue of the demographic breakdown of the population at risk. Thus, the main reason for the decreasing number of COVID-19 deaths is to be sought within the exhausted demographic pool of the elderly population in 2020, when the mortality rate was 19% higher compared to the previous five-year period (2015-2019). Demographic disparities across regions are immense and statistically explain the differences in the ?infected versus deceased? ratio. The excess mortality in 2020 was unusually high, but the projected value for 2020 based on the mortality pattern across age groups from 2015 to 2019 contributed up to one-third of the surplus. So, for one-quarter of alleged COVID-19 deaths (roughly 600 out of some 3,300 in 2020), death was expected to take place in 2020 anyway.

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)0.003
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStanovnistvoSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207