MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6931871798 · doi:10.5683/sp2/uqg5ks

Smart Discharges Uganda Under 5: Phase I clinical data of children 6-60 months

2021· dataset· en· W6931871798 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueBorealis · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsBC Research (Canada)University of British ColumbiaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResearch ethicsCohortMissing dataEthics committeeAnthropometryData collectionCohort studyObservational studyDescriptive statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This data is a subset of the Smart Discharges Uganda Under 5 years parent study and is specific to the Phase I observational cohort of children aged 6-60m. <br> <br/><strong>Objective(s):</strong> Used as part of the Smart Discharge prediction modelling for adverse outcomes such as post-discharge death and readmission. <br> <br /><strong>Data Description:</strong> All data were collected at the point of care using encrypted study tablets and these data were then uploaded to a Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) database hosted at the BC Children’s Hospital Research Institute (Vancouver, Canada). At admission, trained study nurses systematically collected data on clinical, social and demographic variables. Following discharge, field officers contacted caregivers at 2 and 4 months by phone, and in-person at 6 months, to determine vital status, post-discharge health-seeking, and readmission details. Verbal autopsies were conducted for children who had died following discharge. . <br> <br /><strong>Data Processing:</strong> Created z-scores for anthropometry variables using height and weight according to WHO cutoff. Distance to hospital was calculated using latitude and longitude. Extra symptom and diagnosis categories were created based on text field in these two variables. BCS score was created by summing all individual components.<br> <br /><strong>Limitations:</strong> There are missing dates and the admission, discharge, and readmission dates are not in order. <br> <br /><strong>Ethics Declaration:</strong> This study was approved by the Mbarara University of Science and Technology Research Ethics Committee (No. 15/10-16), the Uganda National Institute of Science and Technology (HS 2207), and the University of British Columbia / Children & Women’s Health Centre of British Columbia Research Ethics Board (H16-02679). This manuscript adheres to the guidelines for STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.003
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.309 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBorealisFrench-language works237,207