Spatio‐Temporal Scan Statistics for the Detection of Outbreaks Involving Common Molecular Subtypes: Using Human Cases of <i>Escherichia coli</i> O157:H7 Provincial PFGE Pattern 8 (National Designation ECXAI.0001) in Alberta as an Example
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molecular typing methods have become a common part of the surveillance of foodborne pathogens. In particular, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) has been used successfully to identify outbreaks of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in humans from a variety of food and environmental sources. However, some PFGE patterns appear commonly in surveillance systems, making it more difficult to distinguish between outbreak and sporadic cases based on molecular data alone. In addition, it is unknown whether these common patterns might have unique epidemiological characteristics reflected in their spatial and temporal distributions. Using E. coli O157:H7 surveillance data from Alberta, collected from 2000 to 2002, we investigated whether E. coli O157:H7 with provincial PFGE pattern 8 (national designation ECXAI.0001) clustered in space, time and space-time relative to other PFGE patterns using the spatial scan statistic. Based on our purely spatial and temporal scans using a Bernoulli model, there did not appear to be strong evidence that isolates of E. coli O157:H7 with provincial PFGE pattern 8 are distributed differently from other PFGE patterns. However, we did identify space-time clusters of isolates with PFGE pattern 8, using a Bernoulli model and a space-time permutation model, which included known outbreaks and potentially unrecognized outbreaks or additional outbreak cases. There were differences between the two models in the space-time clusters identified, which suggests that the use of both models could increase the sensitivity of a quantitative surveillance system for identifying outbreaks involving isolates sharing a common PFGE pattern.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".