HEAVY RAINFALL AND WATERBORNE DISEASE OUTBREAKS: THE WALKERTON EXAMPLE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research indicates that excessive rainfall has been a significant contributor to historical waterborne disease outbreaks. The Meteorological Service of Canada, Environment Canada, provided an analysis and testimony to the Walkerton Inquiry on the excessive rainfall events, including an assessment of the historical significance and expected return periods of the rainfall amounts. While the onset of the majority of the Walkerton, Ontario, Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Campylobacter outbreak occurred several days after a heavy rainfall on May 12, the accumulated 5-d rainfall amounts from 8-12 May were particularly significant. These 5-d accumulations could, on average, only be expected once every 60 yr or more in Walkerton and once every 100 yr or so in the heaviest rainfall area to the south of Walkerton. The significant link between excess rainfall and waterborne disease outbreaks, in conjunction with other multiple risk factors, indicates that meteorological and climatological conditions need to be considered by water managers, public health officials, and private citizens as a significant risk factor for water contamination. A system to identify and project the impacts of such challenging or extreme weather conditions on water supply systems could be developed using a combination of weather/climate monitoring information and weather prediction or quantitative precipitation forecast information. The use of weather monitoring and forecast information or a "wellhead alert system" could alert water system and water supply managers on the potential response of their systems to challenging weather conditions and additional requirements to protect health. Similar approaches have recently been used by beach managers in parts of the United States to predict day-to-day water quality for beach advisories.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".