How to choose geographical units in ecological studies: Proposal and application to campylobacteriosis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In spatial epidemiology, the choice of an appropriate geographical unit of analysis is a key decision that will influence most aspects of the study. In this study, we proposed and applied a set of measurable criteria applicable for orienting the choice of geographical unit. Nine criteria were selected, covering many aspects such as biological relevance, communicability of results, ease of data access, distribution of exposure variables, cases and population, and shape of unit. These criteria were then applied to compare various geographical units derived from administrative, health services, and natural frameworks that could be used for the study of the spatial distribution of campylobacteriosis in the province of Quebec, Canada. In this study, municipality was the geographical unit that performed the best according to our assessment and given the specific objectives and time period of the study. Future research areas for optimizing the choice of geographical unit are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it