MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Emergence of an Invasive Clone of Nontoxigenic <i>Corynebacterium diphtheriae</i> in the Urban Poor Population of Vancouver, Canada

2006· article· en· W2132621688 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Marc G. Romney, D. Roscoe, Kathryn Bernard, Samuel K. Lai, Androulla Efstratiou, A. M. Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Microbiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiphtheria, Corynebacterium, and Tetanus
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaVancouver Coastal HealthSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaProvidence Health Care
FundersBritish Columbia Centre for Disease ControlPublic Health Agency
KeywordsCorynebacterium diphtheriaeBacteremiaRibotypingPopulationMicrobiologyDiphtheriaclone (Java method)BiologyVirologyMedicineAntibioticsGenotypeVaccinationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Invasive disease due to Corynebacterium diphtheriae is rare in North America. Here we describe the emergence of a predominant clone of a nontoxigenic strain of C. diphtheriae in the impoverished population of Vancouver's downtown core. This clone has caused significant morbidity and contributed to at least two deaths. Over a 5-year period, seven cases of bacteremia due to C. diphtheriae were detected in patients admitted to Vancouver hospitals. Injection drug use, diabetes mellitus, skin colonization/infection with C. diphtheriae, and homelessness all appeared to be related to the development of bacteremia with the organism. Ribotyping of isolates recovered from blood culture revealed a predominant ribotype pattern that has not previously been reported in North America.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.270
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations87
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MicrobiologySame topicDiphtheria, Corynebacterium, and TetanusFrench-language works237,207