MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7036823402

Couverture vaccinale contre la rougeole et distribution de l'âge à la 1ère et la 2ième dose de vaccin dans la région affectée par l'épidémie de 2011 dans le reste du Québec

2014· other· fr· W7036823402 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité Laval
KeywordsTyphoid vaccineDiphtheriaVaccinationVaccine safety
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'éclosion de rougeole de 2011 a affecté 8 régions du Québec, mais 65% des cas résidaient dans deux territoires de CLSC. Pour prévenir de nouvelles éclosions, une campagne de vaccination a été menée dans toutes les écoles du Québec. Cette étude rétrospective, basée sur le ficher provincial de vaccination, a montré qu’avant l’éclosion, la couverture vaccinale à deux doses était inférieure dans les deux CLSC les plus touchés (81%) que dans le reste de la région (87%, p<0,001). L’âge à la première dose y était plus tardif (moyenne 16 vs 14 mois, p<0,001). Après la vaccination scolaire provinciale, 85% des étudiants avaient reçu 2 doses de vaccin, 4,2% une dose mais 11% n’avaient aucune information vaccinale. La concentration des cas de rougeole de 2011 pourrait s’expliquer en partie par une couverture vaccinale légèrement plus faible qu’ailleurs. Malgré une grande campagne de vaccination scolaire, 11% restaient sans preuve de vaccination.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207