A PRELIMINARY REPORT ON THE USE OF CEVITAMIC ACID IN THE TREATMENT OF WHOOPING COUGH
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
The treatment of whooping cough has been a major problem particularly to those interested in the illnesses of children and to the general practitioner for at least the past four centuries. The disease is at times difficult to diagnose and usually difficult to treat. Many of the recommended procedures seem to be effective in a few cases, but few if any give constant results in all cases. One who has tried the various forms of treatment recommended is still searching for an effective agent. Otani 1 in 1936 treated eighty-one cases of whooping cough with large amounts of vitamin C intravenously and found that thirty-four were greatly benefited, thirty-two moderately benefited, and fifteen unaffected. Ormerod and Unkauf 2 of Winnipeg, working without knowledge of Otani’s findings reported ten cases treated with ascorbic acid given orally; confirming the work of Otani and concluding that ascorbic acid definitely shortened the paroxysmal stage of the disease if large amounts were used early in the course of the disease. In a later report by Ormerod, Unkauf and White 3 nineteen additional cases were reported with similar findings. These papers stimulated us to use cevitamic acid in our own cases. We are reporting the following
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it