MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970928864 · doi:10.1017/s0950268805004085

Sesame seed products contaminated with <i>Salmonella</i>: three outbreaks associated with tahini

2005· article· en· W1970928864 on OpenAlexaffabout
Leanne Unicomb, G. C. Simmons, T. Allen Merritt, Joy Gregory, Carolyn Nicol, Peter Jelfs, Martyn Kirk, Aimee Tan, Rachel Thomson, Jim Adamopoulos, C.L. Little, Andrea Currie, Craig Dalton

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Infection · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutbreakSalmonellaGeographyMedicineEnvironmental healthBiologyVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In November 2002, the first of three outbreaks of Salmonella Montevideo infection in Australia and New Zealand was identified in New South Wales, Australia. Affected persons were interviewed, and epidemiologically linked retail outlets inspected. Imported tahini was rapidly identified as the source of infection. The contaminated tahini was recalled and international alerts posted. A second outbreak was identified in Australia in June-July 2003 and another in New Zealand in August 2003. In a total of 68 S. Montevideo infections, 66 cases were contacted. Fifty-four (82%) reported consumption of sesame seed-based foods. Laboratory analyses demonstrated closely related PFGE patterns in the S. Montevideo isolates from human cases and sesame-based foods imported from two countries. On the basis of our investigations sesame-based products were sampled in other jurisdictions and three products in Canada and one in the United Kingdom were positive for Salmonella spp., demonstrating the value of international alerts when food products have a wide distribution and a long shelf life. A review of the controls for Salmonella spp. during the production of sesame-based products is recommended.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations106
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and InfectionSame topicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiologyFrench-language works237,207