MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766200396 · doi:10.1093/infdis/jix354

Drivers of Tuberculosis Transmission

2017· review· en· W2766200396 on OpenAlexaff
Barun Mathema, Jason R. Andrews, Ted Cohen, Martien W. Borgdorff, Marcel A. Behr, Judith R. Glynn, Roxana Rustomjee, Benjamin J. Silk, Robin Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsTuberculosisTransmission (telecommunications)Mycobacterium tuberculosisMedicineTuberculinDiseasePopulationEnvironmental healthImmunologyComputer sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring tuberculosis transmission is exceedingly difficult, given the remarkable variability in the timing of clinical disease after Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection; incident disease can result from either a recent (ie, weeks to months) or a remote (ie, several years to decades) infection event. Although we cannot identify with certainty the timing and location of tuberculosis transmission for individuals, approaches for estimating the individual probability of recent transmission and for estimating the fraction of tuberculosis cases due to recent transmission in populations have been developed. Data used to estimate the probable burden of recent transmission include tuberculosis case notifications in young children and trends in tuberculin skin test and interferon γ-release assays. More recently, M. tuberculosis whole-genome sequencing has been used to estimate population levels of recent transmission, identify the distribution of specific strains within communities, and decipher chains of transmission among culture-positive tuberculosis cases. The factors that drive the transmission of tuberculosis in communities depend on the burden of prevalent tuberculosis; the ways in which individuals live, work, and interact (eg, congregate settings); and the capacity of healthcare and public health systems to identify and effectively treat individuals with infectious forms of tuberculosis. Here we provide an overview of these factors, describe tools for measurement of ongoing transmission, and highlight knowledge gaps that must be addressed.

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)0.001
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations195
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207