Molecular characterization of rotavirus isolates from select Canadian pediatric hospitals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We report the first multi-site rotavirus genotype analysis in Canada. Prior to this study, there was a dearth of rotavirus G and P genotyping data in Canada. Publically funded universal rotavirus vaccination in Canada started in 2011 and has been introduced by four provinces to date. Uptake of rotavirus vaccines in Canada prior to 2012 has been very limited. The aim of this study was to describe the genotypes of rotavirus strains circulating in Canada prior to widespread implementation of rotavirus vaccine by genotyping samples collected from selected paediatric hospitals. Secondly we identified rotavirus strains that differed genetically from those included in the vaccines and which could affect vaccine effectiveness. METHODS: Stool specimens were collected by opportunity sampling of children with gastroenteritis who presented to emergency departments. Samples were genotyped for G (VP7) genotypes and P (VP4) genotypes by hemi-nested multiplex PCR methods. Phylogenetic analysis was carried out on Canadian G9 strains to investigate their relationship to G9 strains that have circulated in other regions of the world. RESULTS: 348 samples were collected, of which 259 samples were rotavirus positive and genotyped. There were 34 rotavirus antigen immunoassay negative samples genotyped using PCR-based methods. Over the four rotavirus seasons, 174 samples were G1P[8], 45 were G3P[8], 22 were G2P[4], 13 were G9P[8], 3 were G4P[8] and 2 were G9P[4]. Sequence analysis showed that all Canadian G9 isolates are within lineage III. CONCLUSIONS: Although a limited number of samples were obtained from a median of 4 centres during the 4 years of the study, it appears that currently approved rotavirus vaccines are well matched to the rotavirus genotypes identified at these hospitals. Further surveillance to monitor the emergence of rotavirus genotypes in Canada is warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".