MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161202368 · doi:10.1017/s0950268802007914

Campylobacter spp. in Icelandic poultry operations and human disease

2003· article· en· W2161202368 on OpenAlexaff
Norman J. Stern, Kelli L. Hiett, Guðni Á. Alfreðsson, Karl G. Kristinsson, Jarle Reiersen, Hildur Harðardóttir, Haraldur Bríem, E. Gunnarsson, Franklín Georgsson, Ruff Lowman, E. Berndtson, Anna M. Lammerding, Greg Paoli, M.T. Musgrove

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Infection · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Canadian institutionsHealth CanadaCanadian Food Inspection Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCampylobacteriosisCampylobacterFlockVeterinary medicineBiologyTransmission (telecommunications)BiosecurityIcelandicPoultry farmingBroilerAnimal scienceMedicineEcologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the observed relationship of campylobacter in poultry operations to human cases in a closed environment. During 1999 in Iceland, domestic cases of campylobacteriosis reached peak levels at 116/100,000 and in 2000 dropped to 33/100,000. Approximately 62% of broiler carcass rinses were contaminated with Campylobacter spp. in 1999. During 2000, only 15% of the broiler flocks tested Campylobacter spp. positive. In 2000, carcasses from flocks which tested positive on the farms at 4 weeks of age were subsequently frozen prior to distribution. We suggest that public education, enhanced on-farm biological security measures, carcass freezing and other unidentified factors, such as variations in weather, contributed to the large reduction in poultry-borne campylobacteriosis. There is no immediate basis for assigning credit to any specific intervention. We continue to seek additional information to understand the decline in campylobacteriosis and to create a risk assessment model for Campylobacter spp. transmission through this well defined system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations163
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and InfectionSame topicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiologyFrench-language works237,207