MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123931989 · doi:10.1258/jrsm.96.6.311

Drinking Water and Infectious Disease: Establishing the Links

2003· article· en· W2123931989 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sandy Cairncross

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfectious disease (medical specialty)Data scienceComputer scienceDiseaseWorld Wide WebMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water has a special significance for epidemiologists, whose very science was founded by John Snow's studies of waterborne cholera in nineteenth century London. Many people believe that such outbreaks have been consigned to history, and that water treatment and disinfection have stopped waterborne disease transmission in developed countries once and for all, except on odd occasions when things go wrong. This book will correct that impression; research in the past decade, by some of the authors collected here, has shown that populations in developed countries, drinking water which has been treated to meet WHO guidelines and EU or USEPA quality standards, can still experience a substantial amount of waterborne enteric infection and disease. The book is based on an OECD expert group meeting held in July 2000 to address the need for international coordination for improved surveillance and outbreak investigation. The focus is on issues of epidemiological methodology, with sections on surveillance systems, on outbreak investigation, and on the investigation of sporadic disease. Nearly half the authors are public officials. That sounds like a recipe for something dry and dreary, but the book makes exciting reading. This is partly because the discussions of methodology are liberally illustrated with cases from the field, and good accounts of epidemiological detective work always impart some of the thrill of the chase. Most of the chapters are also well written, or at least adroitly edited to be very readable. It is unusual for practitioners to be good writers, and this group has done well. The theoretical parts, such as the listing of the factors to bear in mind when designing a surveillance system or an outbreak investigation, should be valuable for teaching. Written as they are by practitioners (or by ex-practitioners who have defected to academia) they are rooted in actual practice but trenchant in describing the weaknesses of current arrangements. Statements such as, ‘The surveillance systems of many European countries are incapable of detecting waterborne disease’ and ‘There is very little evidence that coliform monitoring is predictive of disease associated with drinking water’ bring one up short. Clever ideas, such as the suggestion that one ask the cases in a case-control study to suggest their friends as controls, enliven the text. There are accounts of most of the significant events in the field in the past decade, such as the Milwaukee cryptosporidiosis epidemic with over 400 000 cases, and the court case following the outbreak in Torbay, UK. The cause of the former and the outcome of the latter are given in the book, but I mustn't spoil those stories for you. Others, such as Pierre Payment's prospective studies in Canada, are mentioned in passing and the relevant references are cited. The discussion of recent findings about Cryptosporidium is particularly good on what we don't yet know about it. The book thus offers an effective update on recent developments in the study and prevention of waterborne disease. The shortcomings of the book are minor. The discussion of surveillance system design does not describe how parallel systems can be used to increase sensitivity, or the relative advantage of sentinel versus exhaustive systems; there is no mention of the E. coli O157 outbreak in Walkerton, Ontario; and, though there is one chapter about the developing countries, there is no account of the community-based surveillance systems for detecting cases of guinea-worm disease in Africa, whose effectiveness under difficult conditions—remote and inaccessible communities, severe resource constraints, illiterate frontline workers, multiple language communities, and so on—puts the health authorities of Milwaukee to shame.

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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Society of MedicineSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207