A summary of tuberculosis drug resistance in Canada, 2003−2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Drug-resistant strains of tuberculosis (TB) pose a serious threat to prevention and control efforts.In response to this growing worldwide concern, the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) established and maintains the Canadian Tuberculosis Laboratory Surveillance System (CTBLSS) in partnership with the Canadian Tuberculosis Laboratory Technical Network (CTLTN) and participating laboratories.Objective: To report on national trends and patterns in anti-tuberculosis drug resistance in Canada for the years 2003 to 2013.Method: At the beginning of each calendar year, participating laboratories submit to PHAC reports on the results of anti-tuberculosis drug susceptibility testing for all isolates tested during the preceding year.These data are then analyzed by PHAC and the results are validated by supplying laboratories.The results are published annually as the Tuberculosis Drug Resistance in Canada series.Results: In 2013, anti-tuberculosis drug susceptibility test results for 1,380 isolates were reported to PHAC.Of these, 762 (54%) were reported as Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) where the species was known.Two thirds (68%) of all the reported isolates originated from the three largest provinces, British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec.Overall, of the laboratory results received, 112 (8.1%) showed resistance to at least one first-line drug and, of these, the majority (93 or 83%) were monoresistant.Conclusion: TB drug resistance observed in Canada remains well below the global average.Over the last 10 years, the percentage of isolates with resistance to one or more of the first-line medications has decreased from 10.5% in 2003 to 8.1% in 2013.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".