MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805963623 · doi:10.1111/1348-0421.12606

Outbreak of mumps virus genotype G infection in tribal individuals during 2016–17 in India

2018· article· en· W2805963623 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sunil R. Vaidya, Siddharth M. Tilavat, V. S. Hamde, Divya R. Bhattad

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrobiology and Immunology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVirology and Viral Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutbreakBiologyGenotypeVirologyMumps virusVirusGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tribal individuals presented with fever and uni- or bi-lateral parotitis in Galonda and Silli villages (Dadra and Nagar Haveli, India) between 2 October 2016 and 19 March 2017. Consequently, the magnitude and epidemiological characteristics of the outbreak were investigated. Overall, 139 cases of suspected mumps were identified in both the above villages. Most of the suspected cases were 5-15 years old, the exceptions being three adults who had no noticeable complications. Specimens were collected from 42 of the suspected cases and their close contacts (n = 39) for laboratory investigation. Mumps infection was laboratory-confirmed in 73.8% and 20.5% of the suspected cases and contacts, respectively. Mumps was confirmed in seven adults aged 17-42 years, including three suspected cases and four contacts. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of a complete virus genome circulating among tribal individuals. Sequencing and phylogenetic studies revealed circulation of mumps virus genotype G in these tribal villages with 99% identity to a mumps virus detected in the UK (1996) and Canada (2009). Comparison with Indian mumps viruses revealed 99% and 98% identity to previously reported isolates from Pune during 2012 and 1986, respectively. Although the outbreak was large, no major complications were reported in the tribal villages. Detection of asymptomatic mumps in numerous close contacts indicates the importance of laboratory investigations in an outbreak setting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrobiology and ImmunologySame topicVirology and Viral DiseasesFrench-language works237,207