MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2175638261

Clinical features of dog- and bat-acquired rabies in humans

2012· article· pt· W2175638261 on OpenAlex
Sean Udow, Ruth Ann Marrie, Alan C. Jackson

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Educação Continuada em Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia do CRMV-SP · 2012
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicRabies epidemiology and control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRabiesInterquartile rangeMedicineInternal medicinePathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical differences in rabies due to canine and bat rabies virus variants have been noted, but no detailed studies have been reported to support these observations. Using PubMed and the MMWR we identified 120 case reports of rabies from the USA, Canada, Europe, and Asia. We systematically abstracted selected clinical features, results of investigations, incubation times and durations of illness. Details about clinical features were recorded. Cases were classified as dog- or bat-acquired based on reported animal exposure or viral variant typing by molecular or monoclonal antibody characterization. Categorical variables were summarized as frequency (%), and continuous variables were summarized as median (interquartile range [IQR]). We compared batand dog-acquired cases using chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests for categorical variables, and Mann Whitney U tests for continuous variables. Of 120 cases, 38 (32%) were dog-acquired and 54 (45%) were bat-acquired. Survivors and cases acquired from aerosolized viral exposure or tissue/organ transplantation were excluded. The median incubation times for dog- and bat-acquired rabies were 63 (IQR 42.75, 108) and 52.5 (IQR 27.25, 92.5) days, respectively (p=0.074). The median durations of illness for dog- and bat-acquired rabies were 17 (IQR 11.75, 23) and 14 (9.25,18.5) days, respectively (p=0.201). There was no difference in patients with bat- and dogacquired rabies in terms of the presence of fever, prodromal malaise, encephalopathy, sore throat, cranial nerve abnormalities, hemiparesis or seizures. Clinical manifestations that were more common in bat- than dog-acquired rabies included a local prodrome of sensory or motor symptoms (p=0.026), hemisensory abnormalities (p=0.042), tremor (p=0.003), and myoclonus (p=0.009). Neither tremor nor myoclonus was observed in patients with dog-acquired rabies. Aerophobia and facial or pharygneal spasms were more common in dog- than bat-acquired rabies (p=0.007 and p=0.029, respectively). Hydrophobia was more common in dog-acquired rabies (p=0.054). There was no difference between dog- and bat-acquired rabies in terms of results of diagnostic investigations such as skin biopsy, salivary analysis or the detection of antibodies in serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). The CSF protein was higher for bat rabies (79; IQR 52, 109 mg/dL) than dog rabies (31; IQR 26, 48, mg/dL,; p=0.012). In summary, bat-acquired rabies is associated with more local symptoms, tremor, and myoclonus, whereas dog acquired rabies has more hydrophobia, aerophobia, and pharyngeal or facial spasms. We speculate that these clinical differences may reflect differences in the route of viral entry of the rabies virus variants into the nervous system because fundamental differences in the neuropathology or viral distribution have not been identified. Bat rabies virus variants may also have greater effects on the blood-CSF barrier by affecting endothelial cell permeability through unknown mechanisms.

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.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.311 · 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