Detection of municipalities at-risk of Lyme disease using passive surveillance of Ixodes scapularis as an early signal: A province-specific indicator in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lyme disease, the most commonly reported vector-borne disease in North America, is caused by the spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto, which is transmitted by Ixodes scapularis in eastern Canada and Ixodes pacificus in western Canada. Recently, the northward range expansion of I. scapularis ticks, in south-eastern Canada, has resulted in a dramatic increase in the incidence of human Lyme disease. Detecting emerging areas of Lyme disease risk allows public health to target disease prevention efforts. We analysed passive tick surveillance data from Ontario and Manitoba to i) assess the relationship between the total numbers of I. scapularis submissions in passive surveillance from humans, and the number of human Lyme disease cases, and ii) develop province-specific acarological indicators of risk that can be used to generate surveillance-based risk maps. We also assessed associations between numbers of nymphal I. scapularis tick submissions only and Lyme disease case incidence. Using General Estimating Equation regression, the relationship between I. scapularis submissions (total numbers and numbers of nymphs only) in each census sub-division (CSD) and the number of reported Lyme disease cases was positively correlated and highly significant in the two provinces (P ≤ 0.001). The numbers of I. scapularis submissions over five years discriminated CSDs with ≥ 3 Lyme disease cases from those with < 3 cases with high accuracy when using total numbers of tick submission (Receiver Operating Characteristics area under the curve [AUC] = 0.89) and moderate accuracy (AUC = 0.78) when using nymphal tick submissions only. In Ontario the optimal cut-off point was a total 12 tick submissions from a CSD over five years (Sensitivity = 0.82, Specificity = 0.84), while in Manitoba the cut-off point was five ticks (Sensitivity = 0.71, Specificity = 0.79) suggesting regional variability of the risk of acquiring Lyme disease from an I. scapularis bite. The performances of the acarological indicators developed in this study for Ontario and Manitoba support the ability of passive tick surveillance to provide an early signal of the existence Lyme disease risk areas in regions where ticks and the pathogens they transmit are expanding their range.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".