MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2399001757

Farm-level prevalence and risk factors for detection of hepatitis E virus, porcine enteric calicivirus, and rotavirus in Canadian finisher pigs.

2016· article· en· W2399001757 on OpenAlexaffabout
Barbara Wilhelm, Danielle Leblanc, David Léger, Sheryl Gow, Anne Deckert, David L. Pearl, Robert Friendship, Andrijana Rajić, Alain Houde, Scott McEwen

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of GuelphPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiosecurityRotavirusHerdVeterinary medicineLogistic regressionNorovirusFecesFeline calicivirusBiologyCalicivirusCaliciviridaeHepatitis E virusVirologyVirusMedicineGenotypeMicrobiologyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hepatitis E virus (HEV), norovirus (NoV), and rotavirus (RV) are all hypothesized to infect humans zoonotically via exposure through swine and pork. Our study objectives were to estimate Canadian farm-level prevalence of HEV, NoV [specifically porcine enteric calicivirus (PEC)], and RV in finisher pigs, and to study risk factors for farm level viral detection. Farms were recruited using the Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance (CIPARS) and FoodNet Canada on-farm sampling platforms. Six pooled groups of fecal samples were collected from participating farms, and a questionnaire capturing farm management and biosecurity practices was completed. Samples were assayed using validated real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). We modeled predictors for farm level viral RNA detection using logistic and exact logistic regression. Seventy-two herds were sampled: 51 CIPARS herds (15 sampled twice) and 21 FoodNet Canada herds (one sampled twice). Hepatitis E virus was detected in 30/88 farms [34.1% (95% CI 25.0%, 44.5%)]; PEC in 18 [20.5% (95% CI: 13.4%, 30.0%)], and RV in 6 farms [6.8% (95% CI: 3.2%, 14.1%)]. Farm-level prevalence of viruses varied with province and sampling platform. Requiring shower-in and providing boots for visitors were significant predictors (P < 0.05) in single fixed effect mixed logistic regression analysis for detection of HEV and PEC, respectively. In contrast, all RV positive farms provided boots and coveralls, and 5 of 6 farms required shower-in. We hypothesized that these biosecurity measures delayed the mean age of RV infection, resulting in an association with RV detection in finishers. Obtaining feeder pigs from multiple sources was consistently associated with greater odds of detecting each virus.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiologyFrench-language works237,207