A case‐control study of factors associated with development of clinical disease due to West Nile virus, Saskatchewan 2003
Bibliographic record
Abstract
REASON FOR PERFORMING STUDY: West Nile virus (WNV) was first diagnosed in Saskatchewan equids in 2002. AWNV epidemic was considered highly likely for 2003, which would provide a unique opportunity to study all aspects of WNV subclinical infection and clinical disease development in a relatively naive population. HYPOTHESIS: There are individual equid attributes and management risk factors associated with development of clinical disease. Specifically, this study could address the question of vaccine efficacy for the prevention of development of clinical disease. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted in the summer of 2003 during a province-wide outbreak of WNV. Between 5 and 10 equids were sampled from each of 23 case premises with clinical disease and 23 control premises with no apparent or confirmed clinical disease. Data were analysed to identify risk factors for the development of clinical disease. RESULTS: The proportion of equids serologically positive for natural exposure to West Nile virus was 64% (193/300). Nonvaccinated equids were 23 times (95%CI limits 3.0, 168.5, P = 0.002) more likely to develop clinical disease than those vaccinated. The estimate of vaccine efficacy in this field study was 96% (95%CI limits 67%, 99%). CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated that vaccination was strongly associated with the prevention of clinical disease. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Vaccination is an effective, practical method of prevention of clinical 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".