Short Period Incidence Study of Severe Acute Respiratory Illness (SPRINT-SARI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a multi-centre, prospective, short period incidence observational study of patients in participating hospitals and intensive care units (ICUs) with SARI. The study period will occur, in both Northern and Southern hemispheric winters. The study period will comprise a 5 to 7-day cohort study in which patients meeting a SARI case-definition, who are newly admitted to the hospitals / ICUs at participating sites, will be included in the study. The study will be conducted in 20 to 40-hospital/ ICU-based research networks globally. All clinical information and sample data will only be recorded if taken as part of the routine clinical practice at each site and only fully anonymised and de-identified data will be submitted centrally. The primary aim of this study is to establishing a research response capability for a future epidemic / pandemic through a global SARI observational study. The secondary aim of this study is to investigate the descriptive epidemiology and microbiology profiles of patients with SARI. The tertiary aim of this study is to assess the Ethics, Administrative, Regulatory and Logistic (EARL) barriers to conducting pandemic research on a global level. Severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) continues to be of major relevance to public health worldwide. In the last 10 years there have been multiple SARI outbreaks around the world. The 2009 H1N1 pandemic was estimated to result in more than 200,000 respiratory deaths globally. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines SARI as an acute respiratory infection of recent onset (within 10 days) requiring hospitalisation, manifested by fever (≥38oC) or a history of fever and cough. There is international consensus that it is important to undertake observational studies of patients with SARI as an essential component of pandemic and epidemic research preparedness.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".