MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161051600 · doi:10.1017/s0950268804003474

Seroprevalence of parvovirus B19 infection in daycare educators

2004· article· en· W2161051600 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nicolas L. Gilbert, Theresa W. Gyorkos, Claire Béliveau, Elham Rahme, Cristin J. Muecke, Julio C. Soto

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Infection · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParvovirus B19 Infection Studies
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontMontreal General HospitalMcGill University
FundersGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsParvovirusSeroprevalenceMedicineParvoviridaeCross-sectional studyImmunologyPediatricsSerologyAntibodyVirusPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was undertaken to provide first-time estimates for the seroprevalence of parvovirus B19 infection among daycare educators in Montréal, Canada, and to identify factors associated with seropositivity. A cross-sectional design was used. Directors and educators from 81 daycare centres (DCCs) were surveyed about DCC and personal characteristics respectively, and serum samples from 477 female educators were tested for parvovirus B19 IgG antibodies. The seroprevalence of parvovirus B19 was 70%. Parvovirus B19 seropositivity was significantly associated with age and with working experience in DCCs, but the latter association was restricted to educators aged less than 40 years. In conclusion, working as a daycare educator appears to be associated with increased risk of acquiring parvovirus B19 infection, but this finding will require further investigation. Because of the large proportion of educators susceptible to acquiring parvovirus B19 infection, our findings also highlight the need for preventive measures.

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)0.002
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 score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score0.878

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations36
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and InfectionSame topicParvovirus B19 Infection StudiesFrench-language works237,207