Kennis en hantering van slangbyte deur algemene praktisyns op die platteland van die Vrystaat en Noord-Kaap : original research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ligBackground:l/ig The aim of the study was to determine the knowledge of general practitioners in the rural areas of the Free State and Northern Cape regarding snake bites and their treatment. lbrgligMethods:l/ig Telephonic interviews using structured questionnaires were conducted with a random sample of 50 general practitioners from rural areas in each region. lbrgligResults:l/ig Doctors in each region indicated that they knew the snakes in their region (Free State 93.6% and Northern Cape 91.8%), but only 17% of the Free State and 53.1% of the Northern Cape doctors felt that they knew enough about the treatment of snake bites. More than three quarters of the Northern Cape doctors have polyvalent antiserum available and 49% have used it, compared to only 40.4% of Free State respondents who have polyvalent antiserum and 34.0% who have used it. Northern Cape doctors administer it correctly more frequently. Only a quarter of respondents knew that polyvalent antiserum can be used after the expiry date. lbrgligConclusion:l/ig The knowledge and treatment of snake bites by general practitioners must be addressed through more emphasis in undergraduate training and continuing medical education.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it