MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161911024 · doi:10.1017/s0950268815000400

Urban park-related risks for<i>Giardia</i>spp. infection in dogs

2015· article· en· W2161911024 on OpenAlexafffund
Anya F. Smith, Melanie Rock, Norman F. Neumann, Alessandro Massolo

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Infection · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsAlberta HealthUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesAlberta Heritage Foundation for Medical ResearchUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsGiardiaVeterinary medicineDemographicsFecesTransmission (telecommunications)BiologyRisk factorEnvironmental healthMedicineDemographyEcologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Giardia spp. is a common gastrointestinal (GI) parasite of multiple host species, including dogs and humans, with the potential for zoonotic transmission. The risk of GI parasitism in dogs (including Giardia spp.) may increase with park use in urban areas. This study aimed to (1) determine whether park attendance is a risk factor for Giardia spp. infection in dogs and (2) characterize the behavioural and demographic risk factors for Giardia spp. infection in park-attending and non-park-attending dogs. From August to September 2012, a total of 1293 dog owners completed a survey and 860 corresponding dog faecal samples were collected. Dog faeces were screened for Giardia spp. using a direct immunofluorescence assay and associations assessed among behaviours, demographics, and Giardia spp. infection. Main results included off-leash and swimming frequencies within parks as significantly positively associated with Giardia spp. infection in dogs. Dog-owner age was negatively associated with off-leash and swimming frequencies in parks. The results suggest some recreational behaviours in parks and certain demographics are risk factors for parasitism in pet dogs.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and InfectionSame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207