MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141665262 · doi:10.4269/ajtmh.2005.73.288

ENZYME IMMUNOASSAY OF CRYPTOSPORIDIUM-SPECIFIC IMMUNOGLOBULIN G ANTIBODIES TO ASSESS LONGITUDINAL INFECTION TRENDS IN SIX COMMUNITIES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA, CANADA

2005· article· en· W2141665262 on OpenAlexaffabout
Corinne Ong, Anna S. Li, Jeffrey W. Priest, Ray Copes, Mohamad I. Khan, Murray Fyfe, Stephen A. Marion, Jacquelin M. Roberts, Patrick J. Lammie, Judith L. Isaac‐Renton

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSerologyCryptosporidiumOutbreakAntibodyCryptosporidium parvumImmunoassayBiologyImmunoglobulin MImmunoglobulin GAntigenVirologyImmunologyFecesMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A newly developed enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) that detects immunoglobulin G antibodies to the 27-kDa Cryptosporidium parvum sporozoite surface antigen was used to test 4,097 sera collected from pregnant women in 6 communities in British Columbia, Canada, between January 1996, and December 1997. Waterborne outbreaks of cryptosporidiosis occurred in two of the study communities during the period of follow-up, and ELISA seropositivity was high in all six communities during the study period (77% positive to 92% positive). In the community with the largest outbreak, levels of antibody to the 27-kDa antigen increased rapidly and then decayed to background levels within 3-4 months of the peak of the epidemic curve. Trends in serologic reactivity were complex in all communities, and increased antibody levels not related temporally to known waterborne outbreaks were also observed. Serological assays may provide more accurate information regarding community levels of Cryptosporidium infection.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 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

Citations20
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and HygieneSame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207