Is Universal Screening Necessary? Incidence of Tuberculosis among Tibetan Refugees Arriving in Calgary, Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background . Canadian policy requires refugees with a history of tuberculosis (TB) or abnormal chest radiograph to be screened after arrival for TB. However, Tibetan refugees are indiscriminately screened, regardless of preimmigration assessment. We sought to determine the incidence of latent (LTBI) and active TB, as well as treatment-related outcomes and associations between preimmigration factors and TB infection among Tibetan refugees arriving in Calgary, Alberta. Design . Retrospective cohort study including Tibetan refugees arriving between 2014 and 2016. Associations between preimmigration factors and incidence of latent and active TB were determined using Chi-square tests. Results . Out of 180 subjects, 49 percent had LTBI. LTBI was more common in migrants 30 years of age or older (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn fontstyle="italic">0.009</mml:mn></mml:math>). Treatment initiation and completion rates were high at 90 percent and 76 percent, respectively. No associations between preimmigration factors and treatment completion were found. A case of active TB was detected and treated. Conclusion . Within this cohort, the case of active TB would have been detected through the usual postsurveillance process due to a history of TB and abnormal chest radiograph. Forty-nine percent had LTBI, compared to previously quoted rates of 97 percent. Tibetan refugees should be screened for TB in a similar manner to other refugees resettling in Canada.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".