MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406352265 · doi:10.1002/9781683670438.mcm0014

Prevention of Laboratory‐Acquired Infections

2023· other· en· W4406352265 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Lagacé‐Wiens, Michael Pentella

Bibliographic record

VenueClinMicroNow · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacillus and Francisella bacterial research
Canadian institutionsManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiosafetyBiosecurityLaboratory safetyPreparednessPersonal protective equipmentEnvironmental healthAuditRisk assessmentMedicineRisk managementBiological hazardRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessComputer securityInfectious disease (medical specialty)DiseasePathologyComputer scienceManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Biosafety is protection of the laboratorian from acquiring illness due to pathogens handled in the laboratory. In contrast, biosecurity is protecting the pathogens from acquisition by those who would use them for harmful purposes. The foundational components of a biorisk management program are the performance of risk assessments, selection of mechanisms to mitigate risk, assessment of staff competency, training, an active biosafety committee, performance of safety audits, collaboration with the occupational health program, and continual improvement of the biosafety practices. The risk assessment is a critical tool to prevent laboratory‐acquired infections. Laboratory preparedness is the ability to recognize and respond to occupational, personal, and public health threats and hazards at all times. The blood‐borne pathogens most commonly associated with laboratory infections are hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and HIV. The investigation and management of laboratory exposures and laboratory infections vary considerably according to the pathogen and type of exposure.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.883

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinMicroNowSame topicBacillus and Francisella bacterial researchFrench-language works237,207