Investigating the distribution of calls to a North American animal poison control call center by veterinarians and the public in space, time, and space-time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health assessments via phone call or tele-triage have become very popular. Tele-triage in the veterinary field and North American context is available since the early 2000s. However, there is little knowledge of how caller type influences the distribution of calls. The objectives of this study were to examine the distribution of calls to the Animal Poison Control Center (APCC) by caller type in space, time, and space-time. Data regarding caller location were obtained from the APCC by American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA). The data were analysed using the spatial scan statistic to identify clusters of higher-than-expected proportion of veterinarian or public calls in space, time, and space-time. Statistically significant spatial clusters of increased call frequencies by veterinarians were identified in some western, midwestern, and southwestern states for each year of the study period. Furthermore, annual clusters of increased call frequencies by the general public were identified from some northeastern states. Based on yearly scans, we identified statistically significant temporal clusters of higher-than-expected public calls during Christmas/winter holidays. During space-time scans of the entire study period, we identified a statistically significant cluster of higher-than-expected proportion of veterinarian calls at the beginning of the study period in the western, central, and southeastern states followed by a significant cluster of excess public calls near the end of the study period on the northeast. Our results suggest that user patterns of the APCC vary by region and both season and calendar time.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".