A Comparative Study of the Epidemiological Aspects of Legionnaires’ Disease: Outbreaks in Korea and Japan, 2010 - 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the present study, we compared the epidemiological aspects of Legionnaire' disease (LD) outbreaks in Korea and Japan by analyzing the current state from 2010 to 2014. METHODS: The following factors were analyzed: nationwide cumulative incidence rate (CIR) per 100,000 populations and case-fatality rate in percentage, epidemiological aspects (i.e., case related to gender), male to female morbidity ratio (MFMR), age, seasonality and habitat distribution of LD cases. RESULTS: In total, there were 134 cases of LD with the CIR of 0.05 per 100,000 populations in Korea from 2010 to 2014. During the same period in Japan, there were 4,840 cases of LD with a CIR of 0.76 per 100,000 populations. The CIR in Japan was significantly higher than that in Korea. However, the case-fatality rates were at similar levels (3.0% vs. 5.9%). Moreover, LD affects both sexes differently, accounting for 2.05 and 4.41 of MFMR in Korea and Japan, respectively. In both countries, the incidence mainly occurred among people aged 40 years or older, and peaked in summer (37.3% vs. 33.7% of total cases). Significant differences were observed in the incidence of LD cases between the capital city and county areas in both two countries. These differences in LD risk factors reflect the different influences of reservoir/host with natural or artificial aquatic environments. CONCLUSION: This study provides a quantitative analysis of the epidemiological aspects and risk factors of LD outbreaks in Korea and Japan. We hope this study would be helpful for providing insight on effective future strategies to reduce LD outbreaks.
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 | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".