Considering the Risk of Infection by <i>Cryptosporidium</i> via Consumption of Municipally Treated Drinking Water from a Surface Water Source in a Southwestern Ontario Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through the use of case-control analyses and quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA), relative risks of transmission of cryptosporidiosis have been evaluated (recreational water exposure vs. drinking water consumption) for a Canadian community with higher than national rates of cryptosporidiosis. A QMRA was developed to assess the risk of Cryptosporidium infection through the consumption of municipally treated drinking water. Simulations were based on site-specific surface water contamination levels and drinking water treatment log₁₀ reduction capacity for Cryptosporidium. Results suggested that the risk of Cryptosporidium infection via drinking water in the study community, assuming routine operation of the water treatment plant, was negligible (6 infections per 10¹³ persons per day--5th percentile: 2 infections per 10¹⁵ persons per day; 95th percentile: 3 infections per 10¹² persons per day). The risk is essentially nonexistent during optimized, routine treatment operations. The study community achieves between 7 and 9 log₁₀ Cryptosporidium oocyst reduction through routine water treatment processes. Although these results do not preclude the need for constant vigilance by both water treatment and public health professionals in this community, they suggest that the cause of higher rates of cryptosporidiosis are more likely due to recreational water contact, or perhaps direct animal contact. QMRA can be successfully applied at the community level to identify data gaps, rank relative public health risks, and forecast future risk scenarios. It is most useful when performed in a collaborative way with local stakeholders, from beginning to end of the risk analysis paradigm.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".