MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098930196

HOW TO TREAT AND WHAT TO DO AT HOME?

2015· article· en· W7098930196 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotonic Crystals and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHead (geology)ClothingHair removalProduct (mathematics)Head and neckTea tree oil
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Use a recommended headlice product. Always speak to a pharmacist about the product that is appropriate for you and your family. Follow directions specifi c to the product being used. • Head lice products kill the head lice and many eggs. **Remove nits with a nit comb or drag the nit down the hair shaft with your fi nger nails. Use a bright light so you can properly see the nits. • Check for head lice daily, and remove any nits that are present. It is important that you take the time to do this. It is recommended to remove all nits as head lice products are not 100 % eff ective. • One treatment may not be enough, and a second treatment may be required 7- 10 days later. Overuse of products can be hazardous. • In order for treatment to be fully eff ective, you must properly clean your house. This includes: • Wash all clothing and personal items (including hats, scarves, hair brushes, combs, towels, bedding, stuff ed animals, etc.) in hot soapy water. • Vacuum surfaces that have contact with heads, for example: sofas, seats of cars. • Items that cannot be washed should be drycleaned or placed in an airtight plastic bag for two weeks. • Clean frequently at the same time as treatments. REMINDER You should only use head lice treatment products if head lice are present. There is no evidence that products such as tea tree oil or aromatherapy work to treat head lice. At this time there are NO treatments available to prevent head lice. FOR MORE INFORMATION • Visit the Canadian Pediatric Society website at www.cps.ca • Contact your local school • Contact your local Public Health Nursing offi ce

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhotonic Crystals and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207