MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002499206 · doi:10.1089/vbz.2010.0062

West Nile Virus Finally Debuts in British Columbia 10 Years After Its Introduction to North America

2010· article· en· W2002499206 on OpenAlexaffabout
Muhammad Morshed, Patrick Tang, Martin Petric, Mel Krajden, David Roth, Bonnie Henry, and the BCCDC West Ni Judith Isaac-Renton

Bibliographic record

VenueVector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Centre for Disease Control
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWest Nile virusGeographyEpidemiologyVirologyVirusBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since its first detection in New York (1999), West Nile virus (WNv) has spread across the United States and Canada with the first activity reported in Canada in 2001. By 2004, WNv had been detected almost in every province of Canada and the contiguous regions of the United States with the exception of British Columbia (BC), this despite being detected in Alberta in 2003 and Washington as early as 2002. In August 2009, two human cases were serologically found to have WNv infection. They reported mosquito bites and had only traveled in the South and Central Okanagan areas of BC before their presentation. On the basis of clinical, laboratory, and epidemiological data, these two human cases have been confirmed as the first locally acquired WNv cases in BC. Various factors may have contributed to the 10-year delay in the spread of WNv to BC, including regional weather conditions and unique topography.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.212
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVector-Borne and Zoonotic DiseasesSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207