MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Seroprevalence of Japanese Encephalitis Virus and Risk Factors Associated with Seropositivity in Pigs in Four Mountain Districts in Nepal*

2012· article· en· W1579863876 on OpenAlexaff
Krishna K. Thakur, Ganesh Raj Pant, Luopin Wang, Catherine A. Hill, Roman M. Pogranichniy, S. Manandhar, April J. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueZoonoses and Public Health · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersPurdue University
KeywordsSeroprevalenceJapanese encephalitisVeterinary medicineAbortionLogistic regressionMedicineEncephalitisGeographyVirusEnvironmental healthVirologySerologyBiologyImmunologyAntibodyPregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Japanese encephalitis was recently reported from individuals in the mountain districts of Nepal without travel history to Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV) endemic areas. We performed a cross-sectional study to estimate the seroprevalence of JEV in pigs and subsequently conducted a survey of farmers to identify risk factors associated with seropositivity. In July and August, 2010, 454 pig serum samples were collected and tested by competitive ELISA. Data from a 35-question survey of 109 pig owners were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. Seventy-six (16.7, 95% CI 13.6-20.4) pigs tested positive for anti-JEV antibodies, none of which had been vaccinated against JEV or sourced from JEV endemic areas. Risk factors associated with JEV seropositivity were 'summer abortion', 'wells as a water source', 'urban location', 'reported presence of mosquitoes' and 'lower elevation'. Our results suggest that JEV is likely circulating in the mountain districts of Nepal, and that locally acquired JEV should be considered a risk for residents and travellers in these areas.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations31
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZoonoses and Public HealthSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207