MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The 2003 West Nile virus United States epidemic: the America's Blood Centers experience

2005· article· en· W1981240149 on OpenAlex
Steven Kleinman, Simone A. Glynn, Michael P. Busch, Deborah Todd, L.W. Powell, Larry Pietrelli, George J. Nemo, George B. Schreiber, Celso Bianco, Louis M. Katz

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsNatSerologyWest Nile virusMedicineVirologyBlood donationsAntibodyBlood donorDonationNucleic acid testImmunologyInternal medicineVirusHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Infectious disease (medical specialty)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A detailed assessment of West Nile virus (WNV) yield is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of the WNV nucleic acid amplification technology (NAT) screening implemented in 2003. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: WNV NAT screening and donation data were compiled from members of America's Blood Centers, which collect nearly 50 percent of the US blood supply. WNV RNA screening was performed with either the Gen-Probe/Chiron Procleix transcription-mediated amplification assay or the Roche TaqScreen polymerase chain reaction. Results of alternate NAT and WNV immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody assays conducted on index and follow-up samples were obtained from test manufacturers. Presumed WNV positivity was based on NAT repeat reactivity of the individual index donation whereas confirmatory status was based on additional IgM testing of the index donation and NAT and serology testing of follow-up samples. RESULTS: From July through October 2003, 2.5 million donations were screened for WNV RNA. Of 877 NAT-reactive donations (screening positivity rate of 3.5 per 10,000 units), 430 (49%) were confirmed positive, whereas 68 (8%) lacking follow-up data remained presumed positive. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of a presumed viremic result relative to final confirmatory status were 92 and 99 percent, respectively. WNV activity was highest in the central plains with prevalence per 10,000 peaking August 1 to 15 in Colorado (67.7) and South Dakota (77.5) and August 16 to 31 in Wyoming (74.1) and North Dakota (102.0). CONCLUSIONS: WNV screening interdicted many viremic units, thereby reducing transfusion-transmitted infections. This study demonstrates that a national collaborative effort facilitates timely surveillance of blood donor infectious disease prevalence rates.

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.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · 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