Canadian Acute Respiratory Illness and Flu Scale (CARIFS)
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
Background: The Canadian Acute Respiratory Illness and Flu Scale (CARIFS) is a parent-proxy questionnaire that assesses severity of acute respiratory infections in children. The aim was to (a) perform a cross-cultural adaptation and (b) prove that the Malay CARIFS is a reliable tool. Findings: The CARIFS underwent forward and backward translations as recommended by international guidelines. A pilot study was performed on the harmonised version and the final version of the Malay version of CARIFS was produced. A test-retest, 1 h apart, was then performed on parents with children less than 13 years old, admitted with a respiratory tract infection. Parents of children with asthma and who were not eloquent in Malay, were excluded. The data was analysed for consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) and reliability (test-retest co-efficient). Thirty-three parents were recruited. Children were aged median (IQR) 6 (2.8, 13.3) months with a male: female ratio of 22:11 and 88 % were Malays. Parents were interviewed at median (IQR) 6 (3, 11.5) days of admission. The Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.70 for all items. The test–retest reliability analysis had a minimum and maximum intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.63 and 0.97 respectively. Clinically, the longer patients were admitted, the lower the severity score (r = −0.35, p < 0.05), indicating that they were getting better. Conclusion: The Malay version of CARIFS is a valid and reliable tool to determine severity of respiratory illness in children. Parent-centred questionnaires are useful and should be an adjunct to other methods, in monitoring response to treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 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