MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2340056129 · doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0003913

Endemicity of Zoonotic Diseases in Pigs and Humans in Lowland and Upland Lao PDR: Identification of Socio-cultural Risk Factors

2016· article· en· W2340056129 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hannah Holt, Phouth Inthavong, Boualam Khamlome, Kate Blaszak, Chattouphone Keokamphe, Virasack Somoulay, Anousone Phongmany, Peter A. Durr, Kerryne Graham, John Allen, Blánaid Donnelly, Stuart D. Blacksell, Fred Unger, Delia Grace, Silvia Alonso, Jeff Gilbert

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis Viruses Studies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionCentre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le DéveloppementAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchInternational Development Research CentreWellcome Trust
KeywordsVeterinary medicineTaenia soliumZoonosisSeroprevalenceHygieneTaeniasisCysticercosisBiologyEnvironmental healthCluster (spacecraft)MedicineSerologyHelminthsImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Lao People's Democratic Republic pigs are kept in close contact with families. Human risk of infection with pig zoonoses arises from direct contact and consumption of unsafe pig products. This cross-sectional study was conducted in Luang Prabang (north) and Savannakhet (central-south) Provinces. A total of 59 villages, 895 humans and 647 pigs were sampled and serologically tested for zoonotic pathogens including: hepatitis E virus (HEV), Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV) and Trichinella spiralis; In addition, human sera were tested for Taenia spp. and cysticercosis. Seroprevalence of zoonotic pathogens in humans was high for HEV (Luang Prabang: 48.6%, Savannakhet: 77.7%) and T. spiralis (Luang Prabang: 59.0%, Savannakhet: 40.5%), and lower for JEV (around 5%), Taenia spp. (around 3%) and cysticercosis (Luang Prabang: 6.1, Savannakhet 1.5%). Multiple correspondence analysis and hierarchical clustering of principal components was performed on descriptive data of human hygiene practices, contact with pigs and consumption of pork products. Three clusters were identified: Cluster 1 had low pig contact and good hygiene practices, but had higher risk of T. spiralis. Most people in cluster 2 were involved in pig slaughter (83.7%), handled raw meat or offal (99.4%) and consumed raw pigs' blood (76.4%). Compared to cluster 1, cluster 2 had increased odds of testing seropositive for HEV and JEV. Cluster 3 had the lowest sanitation access and had the highest risk of HEV, cysticercosis and Taenia spp. Farmers which kept their pigs tethered (as opposed to penned) and disposed of manure in water sources had 0.85 (95% CI: 0.18 to 0.91) and 2.39 (95% CI: 1.07 to 5.34) times the odds of having pigs test seropositive for HEV, respectively. The results have been used to identify entry-points for intervention and management strategies to reduce disease exposure in humans and pigs, informing control activities in a cysticercosis hyper-endemic village.

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)0.000
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations70
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS neglected tropical diseasesSame topicHepatitis Viruses Studies and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207