MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028750700 · doi:10.1155/2011/408375

Clustering of<i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i>Cases in Acapulco: Spoligotyping and Risk Factors

2010· article· en· W2028750700 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Nava-Aguilera, Yolanda López‐Vidal, Eva Harris, Arcadio Morales-Pérez, Steven Mitchell, Miguel Flores-Moreno, Ascencio Villegas-Arrizón, José Legorreta-Soberanis, Robert J. Ledogar, Neil Andersson

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and Developmental Immunology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public HealthUniversity of Ottawa
FundersConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsMycobacterium tuberculosisTuberculosisCladeCluster (spacecraft)DemographyBiologyMedicineGeographyPhylogenetic treeGeneticsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recurrence and reinfection of tuberculosis have quite different implications for prevention. We identified 267 spoligotypes of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from consecutive tuberculosis patients in Acapulco, Mexico, to assess the level of clustering and risk factors for clustered strains. Point cluster analysis examined spatial clustering. Risk analysis relied on the Mantel Haenszel procedure to examine bivariate associations, then to develop risk profiles of combinations of risk factors. Supplementary analysis of the spoligotyping data used SpolTools. Spoligotyping identified 85 types, 50 of them previously unreported. The five most common spoligotypes accounted for 55% of tuberculosis cases. One cluster of 70 patients (26% of the series) produced a single spoligotype from the Manila Family (Clade EAI2). The high proportion (78%) of patients infected with cluster strains is compatible with recent transmission of TB in Acapulco. Geomatic analysis showed no spatial clustering; clustering was associated with a risk profile of uneducated cases who lived in single-room dwellings. The Manila emerging strain accounted for one in every four cases, confirming that one strain can predominate in a hyperendemic area.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and Developmental ImmunologySame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207