Peer Review of “SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Uptake in a Correctional Setting: Cross-sectional Study”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a peer-review report submitted for the paper "SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Uptake in a Correctional Setting". Round 1 Review General CommentsThis is an important manuscript [1] describing the efforts of the Rhode Island Department of Corrections (RIDOC) to roll out a vaccine program in their unified state correctional system.First, I would be careful in describing this as an "evaluation."It is a description of the rollout of the vaccine program, and I did not find any elements of an evaluation.Second, the manuscript could be much improved with increased clarity in the writing.Even as a reader who knows more about the RIDOC correctional system than the average reader, I got confused at times about what the authors were referring to.Adding more details on the RIDOC (and how it compares to other correctional systems) will aid generalizability, and also adding more details about the RIDOC vaccination program will help readers contextualize their findings.I recommend rewriting this manuscript with a more general public health audience in mind (who will likely know less about correctional systems).
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 | 0.020 | 0.205 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.018 |
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".