Increase in pediatric recurrent fever evaluations during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on new diagnoses of recurrent fevers and autoinflammatory diseases is largely unknown. The Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) PFAPA/AID Working Group aimed to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of pediatric patients evaluated for recurrent fevers and autoinflammatory diseases in North America. The absolute number of new outpatient visits and the proportion of these visits attributed to recurrent fever diagnoses during the pre-pandemic period (1 March 2019–29 February 2020) and the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (1 March 2020–28 February 2021) were examined. Data were collected from 27 sites in the United States and Canada. Our results showed an increase in the absolute number of new visits for recurrent fever evaluations in 21 of 27 sites during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period. The increase was observed across different geographic regions in North America. Additionally, the proportion of new visits to these centers for recurrent fever in relation to all new patient evaluations was significantly higher during the first year of the pandemic, increasing from 7.8% before the pandemic to 10.9% during the pandemic year (p < 0.001). Our findings showed that the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a higher number of evaluations by pediatric subspecialists for recurrent fevers. Further research is needed to understand the reasons behind these findings and to explore non-infectious triggers for recurrent fevers in children.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".