MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210249459 · doi:10.1186/s44158-021-00032-5

The unseen pandemic: treatment delays and loss to follow-up due to fear of COVID

2022· editorial· en· W4210249459 on OpenAlexaff
Sharon Einav, James Tankel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Anesthesia Analgesia and Critical Care · 2022
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicCollateral damageCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Health careSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Public healthHealth professionalsMedicine2019-20 coronavirus outbreakPsychologyMedical emergencyPsychiatryNursingDiseasePolitical scienceCriminologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Fear of contracting SARS-CoV-2 has transformed public interaction with healthcare professionals and hospitals alike. In turn, this has resulted in a collateral impact on patients' health across medical and surgical paradigms. Understanding the causative factors of this fear, and tackling it head on, is vital to return to pre-pandemic levels of healthcare. MAIN BODY: In this editorial, we explore the evidence base behind the fear of healthcare professionals and facilities that has developed during the course of the SARS-CoV-2pandemic. We also reflect on the ways in which these fears have affected the general public. In so doing, we review a recent article from Montalto et al. that has explored fear of SARS-CoV-2 among patients undergoing surgery in Italy. CONCLUSION: While fear of SARS-CoV-2 is uncommon among surgical patients, there are still those who delay or avoiding seeking medical care due to fear of transmission. Physicians must lead the fight against this fear in a hope to regain the trust of the public.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations26
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Anesthesia Analgesia and Critical CareSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207