MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2411196785

Investigation of tuberculosis transmission in Canadian Arctic Inuit communities using DNA fingerprinting.

2001· article· en· W2411196785 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dennis Kunimoto, Pamela Chedore, Robert W. Allen, S. S. Kasatiya

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTuberculosisDNA profilingRestriction fragment length polymorphismMycobacterium tuberculosisMedicineTypingTransmission (telecommunications)ArcticMolecular epidemiologyDNAGeneticsPolymerase chain reactionGenotypeBiologyEcologyPathologyGene
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To understand the transmission of tuberculosis in Inuit communities in the Baffin region of the Canadian Arctic. METHODS: Twenty-one isolates of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from 19 Inuit patients diagnosed with tuberculosis between February 1991 and September 1993 were analyzed by DNA fingerprinting. The DNA fingerprints were achieved by the standard restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) technique, with subsequent probing using the repetitive insertion segment IS6110. RESULTS: The isolates could be divided into three DNA types. The DNA types generally corresponded to the geographic origins of the patients. In most instances only one DNA type of M. tuberculosis was identified in each community. This suggests that a single case was the start of each of the three clusters, most likely due to reactivation. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that molecular typing of M. tuberculosis was useful in determining the mode of transmission of tuberculosis in a remote area of the Canadian Arctic where the disease is endemic. In addition, the information provides useful information for planning interventions in this setting.

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)0.001
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 score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology→French-language works237,207→