A Cohort Study of Pediatric Shock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the article appearing on pages 317–325 of the November 2015 issue, two contributors were not included among the authors because the omission was not discovered until after the article had been indexed. The authors, the editorial office, and the publisher regret the error. The complete listing of authors and affiliations should appear as follows: Menon, Kusum*; McNally, J. Dayre*; Choong, Karen†; Lawson, Margaret L.*; Ramsay, Tim‡; Hutchison, James S.§; Foster, Jennifer¶; Wong, Hector R.#; and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group STRIPES Investigators. *Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, University of Ottawa; †McMaster Children's Hospital, McMaster University; ‡Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa; §Department of Critical Care, the Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto; ¶Department of Pediatric Critical Care, Isaac Walton Killam Health Centre, Dalhousie University; #Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati REFERENCE Menon K, McNally JD, Choong K, Lawson ML, Ramsay T, Wong HR, Canadian Critical Care Trials Group STRIPES Investigators. A cohort study of pediatric shock: frequency of corticosteriod use and association with clinical outcomes. Shock 44:402–409, 2015.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".