Seasonality in Human Salmonellosis: Assessment of Human Activities and Chicken Contamination as Driving Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study used integrated surveillance data to assess the seasonality in retail chicken contamination and of human activities and their role on the seasonality of human endemic salmonellosis. From June 2005 to May 2008, reported cases of salmonellosis were followed-up comprehensively using a standardized questionnaire, and 616 retail chicken breasts were systematically tested for Salmonella, in one Canadian community. Poisson regression was used to model seasonality of human cases, Salmonella in retail chicken, and to assess the relationship between these and selected meteorological variables. The case-case approach was used to compare the activities of salmonellosis cases that occurred during the summer peak to the other cases. There were 216 human endemic salmonellosis cases (incidence rate: 14.7 cases/100,000 person-years), predominantly of Typhimurium and Enteritidis serotypes (28.4% and 20.8%, respectively). The monthly distribution of cases was associated with ambient temperature (p < 0.001) with a significant seasonal peak in June (p = 0.03) and July (p = 0.0005), but it was not associated with precipitation (p = 0.38). Several activities reported by cases tended to be more frequent during summer. Particularly, attending a barbeque and gardening within the 3 days before the disease onset were two significant risk factors for salmonellosis in June or July compared with the salmonellosis cases that occurred in the other months. Out of all chicken samples, 185 (30%) tested positive for Salmonella spp., Kentucky being the dominant serotype (44.3% of positive samples). The monthly proportion of positive chicken samples showed no seasonal variations (p = 0.30) and was not associated with the monthly count of human cases (p = 0.99). In conclusion, even though evidence generally supports chicken as a primary vehicle of Salmonella to humans, the contamination of retail chicken was not driving the seasonality in human salmonellosis. Attending a barbeque or gardening during the hotter months of the year should be further assessed for their risk.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".