Epidemiology of invasive pneumococcal disease in indigenous and non-indigenous adults in northwestern Ontario, Canada, 2006–2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the use of pneumococcal vaccines, indigenous populations are consistently disproportionately affected by invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD). With recent changes in Ontario's provincial pneumococcal vaccination program, we sought to evaluate the epidemiology and burden of IPD in northwestern Ontario (NWO) Canada - a region that contains a substantial (19.2%) indigenous population. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all adult cases of IPD that were reported to the Thunder Bay District Health Unit, in Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada, over a 10-year period (2006-2015). Patients admitted to the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre with IPD had their charts reviewed to abstract clinical data. Statistical analysis, including incidence rates of IPD, was performed. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-two cases of IPD occurred over the 10-year observation period and clinical data was available for 182 cases. Fifty-three of 182 (29.1%) patients were indigenous. 73 of 182 (40.1%) of patients were immunocompromised. Indigenous patients with IPD were more likely to be immunocompromised than non-indigenous patients (p < 0.001). Serotype data was available for 159 cases of IPD; PCV7, PCV13, and PPV23 covered 5.7%, 28.3%, and 79.2% of isolates, respectively, while 29 (20.8%) were non-vaccine serotypes. The annual incidence rate of IPD ranged from 8.9 to 25.9 per 100,000 among adults 18-64 years old; among adults 65 years of age and older the annual incidence of IPD ranged from 18.5 to 60.7 per 100,000. CONCLUSION: Among adults in NWO, Canada, there is a high incidence of IPD. Immunocompromised indigenous adults in NWO may benefit from pneumococcal vaccination coverage. Emerging non-vaccine serotypes of Streptococcus pneumoniae warrant the consideration of the provincial pneumococcal vaccination program.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".