Transmissibility of the 1918 pandemic influenza in Montreal and Winnipeg of Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The threat of 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) is still causing widespread public concern. A comprehensive understanding of the epidemiology of 1918 pandemic influenza commonly referred to as the Spanish flu may be helpful in offering insight into control strategies for the new pandemic. OBJECTIVE: We explore how the preparedness for a pandemic at the community and individual level impacts the spread of the virus by comparing the transmissibility of the 1918 Spanish flu in two Canadian cities: Montreal and Winnipeg, bearing in mind that each pandemic is unique and the current one may not follow the pattern of the 1918 outbreak. METHODS: The historical epidemiological data obtained for Montreal and Winnipeg in Canada is analyzed to estimate the basic reproduction number which is the most important summary measure of transmission potential of the pandemic. RESULTS: The transmissibility of the 1918 pandemic influenza virus in Winnipeg in the fall of 1918 was found to be much lower than in Montreal based on the estimated reproduction number obtained assuming different serial intervals which are the time between onsets of symptoms in an index case and a secondary case. CONCLUSION: The early preparedness and public health control measures could suggest an explanation for the fact that the number of secondary cases generated by a primary case was significantly reduced in Winnipeg comparing to it in Montreal.
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) | 0.001 | 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".