THE FITTING OF GENERAL FORCE-OF-INFECTION MODELS TO WILDLIFE DISEASE PREVALENCE DATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Researchers and wildlife managers increasingly find themselves in situations where they must deal with infectious wildlife diseases such as chronic wasting disease, brucellosis, tuberculosis, and West Nile virus. Managers are often charged with designing and implementing control strategies, and researchers often seek to determine factors that influence and control the disease process. All of these activities require the ability to measure some indication of a disease's foothold in a population and evaluate factors affecting that foothold. The most common type of data available to managers and researchers is apparent prevalence data. Apparent disease prevalence, the proportion of animals in a sample that are positive for the disease, might seem like a natural measure of disease's foothold, but several properties, in particular, its dependency on age structure and the biasing effects of disease-associated mortality, make it less than ideal. In quantitative epidemiology, the "force of infection," or infection hazard, is generally the preferred parameter for measuring a disease's foothold, and it can be viewed as the most appropriate way to "adjust" apparent prevalence for age structure. The typical ecology curriculum includes little exposure to quantitative epidemiological concepts such as cumulative incidence, apparent prevalence, and the force of infection. The goal of this paper is to present these basic epidemiological concepts and resulting models in an ecological context and to illustrate how they can be applied to understand and address basic epidemiological questions. We demonstrate a practical approach to solving the heretofore intractable problem of fitting general force-of-infection models to wildlife prevalence data using a generalized regression approach. We apply the procedures to Mycobacterium bovis (bovine tuberculosis) prevalence in bison (Bison bison) in Wood Buffalo National Park, Canada, and demonstrate strong age dependency in the force of infection as well as an increased mortality hazard in positive animals.
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 | 0.011 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".