MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599805425 · doi:10.3390/v9030055

Virological Surveillance of Influenza A Subtypes Isolated in 2014 from Clinical Outbreaks in Canadian Swine

2017· article· en· W2599805425 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Helena Grgić, Jackie Gallant, Zvonimir Poljak

Bibliographic record

VenueViruses · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersSwine Innovation Porc
KeywordsOutbreakVirologyMedicinePandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Influenza A viruses (IAVs) are respiratory pathogens associated with an acute respiratory disease that occurs year-round in swine production. It is currently one of the most important pathogens in swine populations, with the potential to infect other host species including humans. Ongoing research indicates that the three major subtypes of IAV-H1N1, H1N2, and H3N2-continue to expand in their genetic and antigenic diversity. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive genomic analysis of 16 IAVs isolated from different clinical outbreaks in Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, and Saskatchewan in 2014. We also examined the genetic basis for probable antigenic differences among sequenced viruses. On the basis of phylogenetic analysis, all 13 Canadian H3N2 viruses belonged to cluster IV, eight H3N2 viruses were part of the IV-C cluster, and one virus belonged to the IV-B and one to the IV-D cluster. Based on standards used in this study, three H3N2 viruses could not be clearly classified into any currently established group within cluster IV (A to F). Three H1N2 viruses were part of the H1α cluster.

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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirusesSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207