MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319958277 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062960

Getting ready to act: theorising a stepwise transition into crisis response at points of entry based on interviews with COVID-19 responders and a military preparedness framework

2023· article· en· W4319958277 on OpenAlexaff
Doret de Rooij, Jacobine Janse, Jörg Raab, Aura Timen

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Canadian institutionsAthena Sustainable Materials Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePreparednessCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PandemicTransition (genetics)Medical emergencyPublic relationsVirologyManagementPathologyOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Points of entry (POE) have an important role in timely national response to infectious diseases threats. However, a guiding framework is lacking for the transition from generic preparedness into optimally specified response for an imminent infectious disease threat, a step called 'operational readiness'. OBJECTIVE: We aim to contribute to the conceptual closure of this preparedness-response gap for infectious disease control at POE by providing content to the operational readiness concept. DESIGN: We first explored the NATO Combat Readiness (NCR) concept for its applicability on infectious disease control at POE, as the military discipline faces the same need of being flexible in preparing for unknown threats. Concepts of the NCR that support the transition into response to a specific threat were integrated into the operational readiness concept. To explore the added value of the concept in practice, we conducted and analysed semistructured interviews of professionals at European POE (n=24) responsible for the early COVID-19 response. RESULTS: Based on the NCR, operational readiness builds on the fact that activating the response capabilities and capacities to a specific threat requires time. For professionals at POE, the transition from generic preparedness into the COVID-19 response led to challenges in specifying response plans, dealing with an overload of information, while experiencing shortages of public health staff. These challenges could be covered within operational readiness by defining the time and the specific staging needed to upgrade response capabilities and capacities. DISCUSSION: We conclude that a guiding framework for operational readiness seems appropriate in relation to the many activities and challenges POE have had to face during the COVID-19 response. Operational readiness is mainly defined by the time dimension required to deploy the response to a specific threat. However, integrating this conceptual framework into practice requires structural and sustainable investments in outbreak preparedness.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.031
Scholarly communication0.0110.020
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicViral Infections and Outbreaks ResearchFrench-language works237,207