Zika: WHO recommends avoiding 'poor parts' of Rio during Olympics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The U.N. health agency also restated the advice it has been giving for months, warning pregnant women not to travel to Zika-hit areas. It also said that since the mosquito-borne disease can also be spread sexually, pregnant women should abstain from sex or practice safe sex with anyone who has recently returned from areas with outbreaks. The World Health Organization's recommended athletes and visitors heading to Rio de Janeiro, Brazil for the Olympics should avoid poor and overcrowded parts of the city to minimize their chances of catching the Zika virusThe WHO declared the spread of Zika in the Americas to be a global emergency earlier this year......the virus has been proven to cause a range of severe birth defects.A Canadian professor who earlier this week called for the Olympics to be postponed or moved was critical of the WHO's recommendation......he says the poor parts of Rio make up 'half the city' and that the WHO 'might as well just tell people not to go.'The WHO said that because the Olympics will take place during Brazil's winter, there will be fewer mosquitoes and the risk of being bitten will be lower.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.081 | 0.044 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".