MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913931476 · doi:10.1016/j.onehlt.2019.100083

A framework for adaptive surveillance of emerging tick-borne zoonoses

2019· review· en· W2913931476 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Katie M. Clow, Patrick A. Leighton, David L. Pearl, Claire M. Jardine

Bibliographic record

VenueOne Health · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Vectors
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOne HealthContext (archaeology)Disease surveillanceTick-borne diseaseZoonotic diseaseTickDiseaseEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessGeographyBiologyPublic healthMedicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significant global ecological changes continue to drive emergence of tick-borne zoonoses around the world. This poses an important threat to both human and animal health, and highlights the need for surveillance systems that are capable of monitoring these complex diseases effectively across different stages of the emergence process. Our objective was to develop an evidence-based framework for surveillance of emerging tick-borne zoonoses. We conducted a realist review to understand the available approaches and major challenges associated with surveillance of emerging tick-borne zoonoses. Lyme disease, with a specific focus on emergence in Canada, was used as a case study to provide real-world context, since the process of disease emergence is ongoing in this country. We synthesize the results to propose a novel framework for adaptive surveillance of emerging tick-borne zoonoses. Goals for each phase of disease emergence are highlighted and approaches are suggested. The framework emphasizes the needs for surveillance systems to be inclusive, standardized, comprehensive and sustainable. We build upon a growing body of infectious disease literature that is advocating for reform to surveillance systems. Although our framework has been developed for tick-borne zoonoses, it is flexible and has the potential to be applied to a variety of other vector-borne and zoonotic diseases.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.228
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations36
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOne HealthSame topicViral Infections and VectorsFrench-language works237,207