Relative effectiveness of Irish factories in the surveillance of slaughtered cattle for visible lesions of tuberculosis, 2005-2007
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Ireland, every animal is examined at slaughter for its fitness for human consumption. The aim of this study was to determine the relative effectiveness of factories in submitting and subsequently in having suspect lesions confirmed as bovine tuberculosis (TB) lesions during the years 2005-2007. This work provides an update from previously published data for years 2003-2004. During 2005-2007 data were available on 4,401,813 cattle from attested herds (i.e. herds classified free of bovine TB), from which data for potential confounding factors were available for 3,344,057 slaughtered animals at one of the 37 export-licensed factories. FINDINGS: From these animals, 8,178 suspect lesions were submitted for laboratory confirmation. Lesions from 5,456 (66.7%) animals tested as positive, and 269 (3.2%) were inconclusive for bovine TB. Logistic regression was used to determine adjusted submission and confirmation risks for each factory while controlling for confounding factors. Factory rankings based on adjusted and crude risks were similar. The average crude submission risk for all the factories was 25 lesions per 10,000 animals slaughtered, ranging from 0 to 52. The crude confirmation risk varied between 30.3% and 91.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variation in the effectiveness of lesion submission and subsequent confirmation as bovine TB was found among the 37 factories. Compared to previous years (2003-2004), there was an increased bovine TB lesion submission and confirmation risk. Continued monitoring of the effectiveness of slaughter surveillance in Ireland is recommended; emphasis should be placed on efforts to improve bovine TB surveillance in factories with lower rankings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".