COVID-19 in Ontario Long-term Care Facilities Project, a manually curated and validated database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and summaryIn late December 2019, a novel, emerging coronavirus, termed as "Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-related Coronavirus Type 2" (SARS-CoV-2) was identified as the infectious agent responsible for the generally mild, but sometimes life-threatening and even fatal "Coronavirus Disease 2019" (COVID-19).As of December 7, 2021, COVID-19 has imposed a dramatic toll of infections (more than 265 million cases) and deaths (more than 2.5 million deaths).Long-term care facilities, including nursing homes, residential aged care facilities, retirement homes, skilled nursing facilities and assisted living communities, among others, have represented and still represent healthcare settings particularly vulnerable to the COVID-19 spread (1).For instance, in Canada, residents living in these facilities, being elderly and particularly frail, often with many co-morbidities, have been disproportionately hit by the pandemic, contributing to approximately two thirds (67%) of the entire total toll of deaths (2).As of December 5, 2021, 11.8% and 7.0% of COVID-19 outbreaks occurred in the Ontario region have affected long-term care facilities and retirement homes, respectively, according to Public Health Ontario (PHO).A recently published systematic review (3) has identified an array of parameters, including bed size and location in a high SARS-CoV-2 prevalence and mortality area, and number of staff members, as variables predicting COVID-19 related outcomes.However, in some cases, findings were contrasting, with a number of studies reporting that higher staffing was associated with a higher mortality rate and other investigations obtaining opposite results.Discrepancies in both the direction and magnitude of the effect could be found also for other parameters, such as quality indicators, like star rating, and ownership, or pandemic preparedness indicators, including implementation of public health interventions for controlling and managing prior infections and the number of previous outbreaks occurred in the facility.Such conflicting findings may depend on the specific nature of the jurisdiction and the setting of each long-term care facility.As such, local data is of paramount importance to inform public health workers, policy-and decision-makers and relevant stakeholders in a data-driven and evidence-based fashion.Several databases exist, mainly dedicated to (non-pharmaceutical and pharmaceutical) public health interventions (4, 5), underlying biological mechanisms, in terms of pathways and cascades (6), but, to the best of authors' knowledge, no one specifically on long-term care facilities.Specifically, there are websites that provide information for each long-term care home in Ontario such as the location of the home, type of facility, and general statistics pertaining to the care offered.However, the information is limited as the focus of this data is to provide
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 | 0.004 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.005 |
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".