Invasive pneumococcal disease in Greenland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the incidence and outcome of pneumococcal infections in Greenland with special reference to serotypes. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study of invasive pneumococcal infections in Greenland in the period 1996-2002. METHODS: Cases were defined as patients with positive cultures of Streptococcus pneumoniae from blood and/or CSF received at the microbiological laboratory of Dronning Ingrids Hospital in Nuuk. Cultures were sent to Statens Serum Institut in Copenhagen for serotyping. Medical charts were reviewed. RESULTS: Fifty-one cases were identified. Incidence among Inuit was 54 and among non-Inuit 17 per 100,000 per year. Twenty-one patients were in the age group 35-49 years and 20 in the age group 50-64 years. Twenty patients had meningitis (incidence 6 per 100,000). Seventeen patients died (33%). Most common serotypes were 1 (6 cases) and 12F (8 cases). Mortality rate was significantly higher among patients with 12F than among others (p<0.01). No patients wit serotype 1 died. CONCLUSION: Like in Canada and Alaska, the incidence of invasive pneumococcal disease, especially meningitis, is high among the Inuit in Greenland. Young and middle-aged adults were most frequently affected. Serotype seems to be an important determinant of the outcome of invasive pneumococcal disease.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".