Preparing for infectious disease threats at mass gatherings: the case of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ith the global population approaching seven billion and international access to commercial air travel expanding, the number, frequency and scale of human congregations has increased dramatically during the past half century. Today, mass gatherings of hundreds of thousands to millions of people from all corners of the globe have become common. Such gatherings are held for a multitude of reasons: religious (e.g., the Hajj), political (e.g., Group of 20 [G-20] summits), socio-cultural (e.g., World Pride) and sports-related (e.g., Olympic Games), to name a few. 1 Despite their importance, mass gatherings carry the risk of locally amplifying and subsequently disseminating infectious disease threats around the world. 2 When travellers attend a mass gathering, they may unknowingly introduce infectious agents acquired in their home environments. In settings conducive to the spread of infection, epidemics among attendees and their contacts may ensue. Those who are exposed may subsequently transport the infectious agents internationally, spawning new epidemics in other parts of the world. urrent efforts to prepare for infectious disease threats at mass gatherings are generally led by the host country, often in collaboration with international public health agencies. 2 Such efforts employ strategies that are directed, for the most part, at the site of the gathering. These may include enhanced surveillance, infection control measures to minimize the transmission of disease and ensuring the availability of resources to enable rapid response to an epidemic, should one arise. However, these efforts do not typically take into account a broader understanding of the populations attending the mass gathering and the risks associated with infectious disease threats at their points of departure. We propose a conceptual model that could complement existing preparedness efforts by expanding the geographic perspective of public health surveillance worldwide at a time when large numbers of people from around the globe are travelling to attend a mass gathering. Using this model would provide public health experts with the opportunity to identify and deal with an infectious disease threat at its source and, failing that, at the site of the mass gathering. This approach could potentially prevent importation of infection by persons travelling to the site of the mass gathering and/or exportation of infection as attendees at the gathering return home.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».