MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W170060375

Demographic risk factors of pulmonary colonization by non-tuberculous mycobacteria.

2010· article· en· W170060375 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eduardo Hernández‐Garduño, R. Kevin Elwood

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMycobacterium research and diagnosis
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonisationMedicineLung diseaseGynecologyColonizationMicrobiologyInternal medicineBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SETTING: British Columbia (BC), Canada. OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk factors for pulmonary colonization by non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM). DESIGN: Retrospective study of subjects colonized by NTM from 1990 to 2006. Subjects without mycobacterial disease and with at least three negative cultures served as controls. RESULTS: Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) species were the most common NTM. Risk factors of colonization included age > or = 60 years (aOR 2.3), female sex (aOR 1.2), residency in Canada for at least 10 years (aOR 3.8), Canadian-born aboriginal (aOR 1.8), and Canadian-born non-aboriginal (aOR 1.4). Predictors of MAC colonization included White race (aOR 1.6) and residency in Canada for at least 10 years, which was the strongest predictor (aOR 6.7). Aboriginal origin was associated with non-MAC colonization (aOR 1.8), and Canadian-born people from the East/South-East Asian ethnic groups were protected from MAC colonization (aOR 0.2), all aOR P < 0.05. CONCLUSION: Older age, female sex, having been born in Canada, long residency in BC and White race predict pulmonary NTM colonization, while Aboriginal origin predicts non-MAC colonization. Further research is needed to identify environmental NTM sources in BC and to determine their relation to colonization and disease.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicMycobacterium research and diagnosisFrench-language works237,207