MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280530135 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.789527

The Evolution of Vigilance and Its Atrophy Preceding the COVID-19 Global Pandemic

2022· article· en· W4280530135 on OpenAlexaffabout
Theodore J. Witek, Robert Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVigilance (psychology)PandemicPreparednessCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)OutbreakPublic healthPolitical scienceMedicineDevelopment economicsPsychologyDiseaseVirologyPathologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)LawEconomicsCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Recent infectious outbreaks preceding the COVID-19 crisis resulted in the evolution of vigilance for preparedness against the next pandemic. This vigilance was maintained to varying degrees in different jurisdictions. Objective: To evaluate the evolution of vigilance following previous epidemics and pandemics and the subsequent atrophy of vigilance prior to the COVID-19 global pandemic. Methods: We evaluated documentation discussing US, Canada, and South Korea from March 2002 to October 2021. Our policy search strategy was rooted in academic literature, government documents and media reports. Results: In the US, there were examples of atrophy of vigilance; however, there was clear understanding of pandemic readiness actions that were simply not executed amongst political chaos. In Canada, political mishaps were less evident at the time the pandemic unfolded. Nevertheless, atrophy was evident with erosion in preparedness programs following SARS. South Korea appeared least subjected to atrophy of vigilance. The more recent MERS outbreak prompted evolution of sustained vigilance and compliance with basic public health measures such as mask wearing. Recommendations: Policy options need to be explored and instituted that increase protection of preparedness programs through institutional safeguards and accountability measure.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicViral Infections and Outbreaks ResearchFrench-language works237,207