MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095477491 · doi:10.1089/fpd.2010.0786

Food-Specific Attribution of Selected Gastrointestinal Illnesses: Estimates from a Canadian Expert Elicitation Survey

2011· article· en· W2095477491 on OpenAlex
Valerie Davidson, André Ravel, To N. Nguyen, Aamir Fazil, Juliana Ruzante

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueFoodborne Pathogens and Disease · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Safety and Hygiene
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCarnegie Mellon University
KeywordsSalmonellaCampylobacterShigellaExpert elicitationBiologyListeriaFoodborne pathogenAstrovirusPathogenVibrio parahaemolyticusSalmonella entericaListeria monocytogenesEnvironmental healthRotavirusMicrobiologyMedicineGeographyVirologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study used a structured expert elicitation survey to derive estimates of food-specific attribution for nine illnesses caused by enteric pathogens in Canada. It was based on a similar survey conducted in the United States and focused on Campylobacter spp., Escherichia coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, nontyphoidal Salmonella enterica, Shigella spp., Vibrio spp., Yersinia enterocolitica, Cryptosporidium parvum, and Norwalk-like virus. A snowball approach was used to identify food safety experts within Canada. Survey respondents provided background information as well as self-assessments of their expertise for each pathogen and the 12 food categories. Depending on the pathogen, food source attribution estimates were based on responses from between 10 and 35 experts. For each pathogen, experts divided their estimates of total foodborne illness across 12 food categories and they provided a best estimate for each category as well as 5th and 95th percentile limits for foods considered to be vehicles. Their responses were treated as triangular probability distributions, and linear aggregation was used to combine the opinions of each group of experts for each pathogen-food source group. Across the 108 pathogen-food groups, a majority of experts agreed on 30 sources and 48 nonsources for illness. The number of food groups considered to be pathogen sources by a majority of experts varied by pathogen from a low of one food source for Vibrio spp. (seafood) and C. parvum (produce) to a high of seven food sources for Salmonella spp. Beta distributions were fitted to the aggregated opinions and were reasonable representations for most of the pathogen-food group attributions. These results will be used to quantitatively assess the burden of foodborne illness in Canada as well as to analyze the uncertainty in our estimates.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.264
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.163 · 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