Expert Elicitation as a Means to Attribute 28 Enteric Pathogens to Foodborne, Waterborne, Animal Contact, and Person-to-Person Transmission Routes in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enteric illness contributes to a significant burden of illness in Canada and globally. Understanding its sources is a critical step in identifying and preventing health risks. Expert elicitation is a powerful tool, used previously, to obtain information about enteric illness source attribution where information is difficult or expensive to obtain. Thirty-one experts estimated transmission of 28 pathogens via major transmission routes (foodborne, waterborne, animal contact, person-to-person, and other) at the point of consumption. The elicitation consisted of a (snowball) recruitment phase; administration of a pre-survey to collect background information, an introductory webinar, an elicitation survey, a 1-day discussion, survey readministration, and a feedback exercise, and surveys were administered online. Experts were prompted to quantify changes in contamination at the point of entry into the kitchen versus point of consumption. Estimates were combined via triangular probability distributions, and medians and 90% credible-interval estimates were produced. Transmission was attributed primarily to food for Bacillus cereus, Clostridium perfringens, Cyclospora cayetanensis, Trichinella spp., all three Vibrio spp. categories explored, and Yersinia enterocolitica. Multisource pathogens (e.g., transmitted commonly through both water and food) such as Campylobacter spp., four Escherichia coli categories, Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella spp., and Staphylococcus aureus were also estimated as mostly foodborne. Water was the primary pathway for Giardia spp. and Cryptosporidium spp., and person-to-person transmission dominated for six enteric viruses and Shigella spp. Consideration of the point of attribution highlighted the importance of food handling and cross-contamination in the transmission pathway. This study provides source attribution estimates of enteric illness for Canada, considering all possible transmission routes. Further research is necessary to improve our understanding of poorly characterized pathogens such as sapovirus and E. coli subgroups in Canada.
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 | 0.016 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".