Laboratory-based evaluation of legionellosis epidemiology in Ontario, Canada, 1978 to 2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Legionellosis is a common cause of severe community acquired pneumonia and respiratory disease outbreaks. The Ontario Public Health Laboratory (OPHL) has conducted most testing for Legionella species in the Canadian province of Ontario since 1978, and represents a multi-decade repository of population-based data on legionellosis epidemiology. We sought to provide a laboratory-based review of the epidemiology of legionellosis in Ontario over the past 3 decades, with a focus on changing rates of disease and species associated with legionellosis during that time period. METHODS: We analyzed cases that were submitted and tested positive for legionellosis from 1978 to 2006 using Poisson regression models incorporating temporal, spatial, and demographic covariates. Predictors of infection with culture-confirmed L. pneumophila serogroup 1 (LP1) were evaluated with logistic regression models. RESULTS: 1,401 cases of legionellosis tested positive from 1978 to 2006. As in other studies, we found a late summer to early autumn seasonality in disease occurrence with disease risk increasing with age and in males. In contrast to other studies, we found a decreasing trend in cases in the recent decade (IRR 0.93, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.95, P-value = 0.001); only 66% of culture-confirmed isolates were found to be LP1. CONCLUSION: Despite similarities with disease epidemiology in other regions, legionellosis appears to have declined in the past decade in Ontario, in contrast to trends observed in the United States and parts of Europe. Furthermore, a different range of Legionella species is responsible for illness, suggesting a distinctive legionellosis epidemiology in this North American region.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".