MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399099832 · doi:10.5694/mja2.52321

Emergency department presentations in Queensland by First Nations people, remote residents, and young children during the <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 pandemic, 2020: interrupted time series analysis

2024· letter· en· W4399099832 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amy Sweeny, Gerben Keijzers, Dinesh Palipana, John Gerrard, Julia Crilly

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Medical Journal of Australia · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEmergency Medicine Foundation
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Emergency departmentInterrupted Time Series Analysis2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Medical emergencyInterrupted time seriesMedicineVirologyNursingStatisticsOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After the World Health Organization declared the international coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on 11 March 2020, Australian governments introduced stringent public health measures, including stay-at-home orders, school and business closures, and interstate border closures. During the initial restrictions period (11 March – 30 June 2020), the number of emergency department (ED) presentations in Queensland was 19.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.9–20.1%) lower than predicted by pre-pandemic data.1 We assessed the effects of these restrictions on ED presentations by three groups who experience health care inequity to determine whether specific public health approaches are required in future outbreaks to ensure that they receive appropriate emergency care.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Medical Journal of AustraliaSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207