Bordetella pertussisin sporadic and outbreak settings in Alberta, Canada, July 2004 – December 2012
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: ProvLab Alberta provides all laboratory testing for Bordetella pertussis including sporadic cases and outbreak investigations through collaborations with provincial public health partners. We describe B. pertussis activity in Alberta from July 2004 to December 2012. METHODS: Laboratory testing for pertussis was analyzed using interpreted laboratory data that was generated by DIAL, a secure web-based platform. Duplicate specimens from the same individual ≤90 days were excluded to generate a case-based dataset. Immunization status of confirmed pertussis cases from the provincial immunization repository was reviewed. RESULTS: Overall, 7.1% of suspected pertussis cases tested positive with a higher positivity rate in outbreak as compared to sporadic setting. Annual variations in sporadic pertussis cases were observed across the province with higher positivity rates in 2005, 2008, 2009 and 2012. A significantly higher positivity rate was observed in a northern region of Alberta. While the positivity rate in sporadic setting was highest in adolescents aged 10 to <15 years old (14.8%), population-based disease burden was highest in young children <5 years old. Of the 81.6% (n = 1,348) pertussis cases with immunization records, 48.3% were up-to-date with immunization. The pertussis cases that were up-to-date with their immunization were older (median age 12.9 years) as compared to those with incomplete (median age 9.7 years) or no pertussis immunization (median age 3.8 years). CONCLUSIONS: Cyclic pattern of annual pertussis activity with geographic variation was observed in Alberta with no obvious case finding effect from outbreak investigations. The high positivity rates in adolescents suggested an underestimation of disease burden in this age group.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".