MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125099130 · doi:10.1086/314051

<i>Cyclospora cayetanensis:</i>A Review, Focusing on the Outbreaks of Cyclosporiasis in the 1990s

2000· review· en· W2125099130 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barbara L. Herwaldt

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMultidisciplinary University Research Initiative
KeywordsCyclospora cayetanensisCyclosporaOutbreakMedicinePublic healthEnvironmental healthVirologyMicrobiologyCryptosporidiumBiologyPathologyFeces

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyclospora cayetanensis, a coccidian parasite that causes protracted, relapsing gastroenteritis, has a short recorded history. In retrospect, the first 3 documented human cases of Cyclospora infection were diagnosed in 1977 and 1978. However, not much was published about the organism until the 1990s. One of the surprises has been the fact that a parasite that likely requires days to weeks outside the host to become infectious has repeatedly caused foodborne outbreaks, including large multistate outbreaks in the United States and Canada. In this review, I discuss what has been learned about this enigmatic parasite since its discovery and what some of the remaining questions are. My focus is the foodborne and waterborne outbreaks of cyclosporiasis that were documented from 1990 through 1999. The occurrence of the outbreaks highlights the need for health care personnel to consider that seemingly isolated cases of infection could be part of widespread outbreaks and should be reported to public health officials. Health care personnel should also be aware that stool specimens examined for ova and parasites usually are not examined for Cyclospora unless such testing is specifically requested and that Cyclospora infection is treatable with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations345
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207