Epidemiology of <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i> in Cystic Fibrosis in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the most common respiratory pathogen in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF), but the predominant mechanism by which it is acquired is controversial. To determine the frequency of patient-to-patient spread, we evaluated P. aeruginosa isolates from 174 patients treated at the CF clinics in Vancouver, BC, Canada, since 1981. Multiple isolates were obtained from each patient and genetically typed by random amplified polymorphic DNA and pulsed field gel electrophoresis analyses. A total of 157 genetic types of P. aeruginosa was identified, 123 of which were unique to individual patients. A total of 34 types was shared by more than one patient; epidemiologic evidence linked these individuals only in the cases of 10 sibships and 1 pair of unrelated patients. We conclude that there is an extremely low risk in Vancouver for patients with CF to acquire P. aeruginosa from other patients. It appears that prolonged close contact, such as occurs between siblings, is necessary for patient-to-patient spread. The major source of acquisition of P. aeruginosa in CF appears to be from the environment. Considering these observations, we do not recommend segregation of patients with CF on the basis of their colonization status with P. aeruginosa.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".