Travel Patterns and Risk Behavior in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: International travel is associated with an increased risk of enteric, vector-borne and bloodborne infections. The risk of acquiring travel-related illness is higher in those who are immunocompromised. However, little is known about travel practices and risk behaviors in transplant recipients who travel. We herein profile transplant recipients who travel, and characterize their pre-travel precautions, travel activities, burden of illness, and exposure history. METHODS: With the use of a standardized and validated questionnaire, patients attending a transplant clinic were surveyed regarding recent travel and risk behaviors. RESULTS: Of 267 transplant recipients who participated, 95 (36%) indicated that they had recently traveled outside Canada and the USA. Their mean age was 49.9 years, 54% were male, and 54% were born outside Canada. Eighty-six percent of travelers were receiving at least two immunosuppressive drugs at the time of their trip. Sixty-six percent of travelers sought pre-travel advice, primarily from their transplant physician. Sixty-three percent traveled to areas where hepatitis A is endemic, but only 5% had received hepatitis A immunization. Fifty percent traveled to dengue- and malaria-endemic areas, but,25% adhered to mosquito prevention measures. Ten percent reported behaviors that exposed them to blood or body fluids, including injections, body piercing, and casual sexual activity. CONCLUSIONS: Solid organ transplant recipients represent a unique group of compromised travelers; however, few were adequately protected against travel-associated enteric, vector-borne and bloodborne pathogens.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".