MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043240546 · doi:10.1080/17513758.2012.693206

Reproduction numbers for infections with free-living pathogens growing in the environment

2012· article· en· W2043240546 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Dynamics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicZoonotic diseases and public health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersDivision of Emerging FrontiersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsReproductionBiologyBasic reproduction numberEcologyEnvironmental healthMedicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The basic reproduction number ℛ(0) for a compartmental disease model is often calculated by the next generation matrix (NGM) approach. When the interactions within and between disease compartments are interpreted differently, the NGM approach may lead to different ℛ(0) expressions. This is demonstrated by considering a susceptible-infectious-recovered-susceptible model with free-living pathogen (FLP) growing in the environment. Although the environment could play different roles in the disease transmission process, leading to different ℛ(0) expressions, there is a unique type reproduction number when control strategies are applied to the host population. All ℛ(0) expressions agree on the threshold value 1 and preserve their order of magnitude. However, using data for salmonellosis and cholera, it is shown that the estimated ℛ(0) values are substantially different. This study highlights the utility and limitations of reproduction numbers to accurately quantify the effects of control strategies for infections with FLPs growing in the environment.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.253 · 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