MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562631867 · doi:10.1111/nyas.13273

A brief primer on genomic epidemiology: lessons learned from<i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i>

2016· review· en· W2562631867 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer L. Guthrie, Jennifer L. Gardy

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteCanada Research ChairsMichael Smith Health Research BCU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsGenomicsMycobacterium tuberculosisTransmission (telecommunications)TuberculosisEpidemiologyBiologyMolecular epidemiologyComputational biologyGenetic epidemiologyData scienceGeneticsMedicineGenomeComputer scienceGenotypeGenePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genomics is now firmly established as a technique for the investigation and reconstruction of communicable disease outbreaks, with many genomic epidemiology studies focusing on revealing transmission routes of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. In this primer, we introduce the basic techniques underlying transmission inference from genomic data, using illustrative examples from M. tuberculosis and other pathogens routinely sequenced by public health agencies. We describe the laboratory and epidemiological scenarios under which genomics may or may not be used, provide an introduction to sequencing technologies and bioinformatics approaches to identifying transmission-informative variation and resistance-associated mutations, and discuss how variation must be considered in the light of available clinical and epidemiological information to infer transmission.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.355
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.119 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations30
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207