Hvorfor forsvandt spedalskhed fra Danmark i slutningen af middelalderen?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Why did leprosy disappear in Denmark at the end of the Middle Ages?Leprosy and tuberculosis were prevalent in Europe during the first millennium, but thereafter leprosy declined. In Denmark a material of 3033 skeletons from the period 1100-1530 indicates that the prevalence of leprosy among adults was more than one quarter. The material also indicates that leprosy declined in the later Middle Ages, first in towns and cities in the 14th century, later in rural communities around 1550. It is unknown why this occurred. It has been suggested that the decline of leprosy in towns was caused by the isolation of contagious individuals in leprosaria (Sankt Jørgens Gårde). However, this cannot be the only reason because institutionalizing never broke the chain of infection. People suffering from leprosy were contagious many years before they showed visible signs of the disease. Another explanation has been the increasing prevalence of tuberculosis that developed in Denmark with the increasing urbanization in the 13th and 14th centuries and in the rural communities with the intensified cattle breading by the end of the 16th century. There is a certain cross-immunity between the bacteria of the two diseases, but more likely leprosy patients became more susceptible to underlying latent tuberculosis owing to the decline in immune status associated with the progression of the disease. This would lead to increased mortality from tuberculosis and therefore finally to the disappearance of leprosy from Denmark during the late Middle Ages.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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".