Marked Disparity in the Epidemiology of Tuberculosis among Aboriginal Peoples on the Canadian Prairies: the Challenges and Opportunities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While it is established that Aboriginal peoples in the prairie provinces of Canada are disproportionately affected by tuberculosis (TB), little is known about the epidemiology of TB either within or across provincial borders. METHODS: Provincial reporting systems for TB, Statistics Canada censuses and population estimates of Registered Indians provided by Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada were used to estimate the overall (2004 to 2008) and pulmonary (2007 to 2008) TB rates in the prairie provinces. The place of residence at diagnosis of pulmonary TB cases in 2007 to 2008 was also documented. RESULTS: The age- and sex-adjusted incidence of TB in Registered Indians was 52.6 per 100,000 person-years, 38 times higher than in Canadian-born 'others'. Incidence rates in Registered Indians were highest in Manitoba and lowest in Alberta. In Alberta and Saskatchewan, on-reserve rates were more than twice that of off-reserve rates. Rates in the Métis and Registered Indians were similar in Saskatchewan (50.0 and 52.2 per 100,000 person-years, respectively). In 2007 to 2008, approximately 90% of Canadian-born pulmonary TB cases in the prairie provinces were Aboriginal. Outside of one metropolitan area (Winnipeg, Manitoba), most Registered Indian and Métis pulmonary TB cases were concentrated in a relatively small number of communities north of the 53rd parallel. Rates of pulmonary TB in 11 of these communities were >300 per 100,000 person-years. In Manitoba, 49% of off-reserve Registered Indian pulmonary cases were linked to high-incidence reserve communities. INTERPRETATION: The epidemiology of TB among Aboriginal peoples on the Canadian prairies is markedly disparate. Pulmonary TB is highly focal, which is both a concern and an opportunity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".