123: Surveillance for Childhood Lyme Disease by the Canadian Pediatric Surveillance Program (CPSP): Initial Findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lyme disease, a tick-borne zoonoses caused by the bacterium Borrelia burgdorferi, is emerging in Canada, mostly due to the spread of tick vectors into central and eastern Canada. Surveillance in the US suggests that children, especially those 5 to 9 years of age, are at increased risk of infection. Surveillance for childhood Lyme disease was initiated in July 2014 to i) explore incidence in children in Canada; ii) identify emerging locations of, and environmental risk factors for, Lyme disease; iii) define the spectrum of clinical presentation in Canadian children; iv) describe diagnostic methods used by paediatricians; and vi) describe treatment regimens used and the frequency of post-treatment clinical manifestations of Lyme disease. Using the established methodology of the CPSP, approximately 2500 pediatricians receive a monthly electronic survey to report cases of suspected Lyme disease. Case reporters subsequently receive a paper-based, structured questionnaire by mail. The national case definition is used to determine cases as probable or confirmed Lyme disease cases. As of November 2014 20 cases (age range 2–12) have been reported from three provinces: Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. Validation of these reports is in progress. We will describe in this presentation the process and questionnaire used to obtain information on childhood cases of Lyme, as well as details and analysis of data from cases reported in 2014. A pediatrician based reporting program to determine the frequency and characteristics of childhood Lyme disease cases in Canada appears feasible. The program will continue until 2017, and will define the specific epidemiology of this important infection in Canadian children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".