Assessment of population immunity to measles in Ontario, Canada: a Canadian Immunization Research Network (CIRN) study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada eliminated measles in 1998. We conducted a sero-epidemiology study to estimate population immunity to measles in the province of Ontario, Canada and to identify groups at higher risk of outbreaks. We used a previously developed modified enzyme immunoassay to test 1,199 residual sera from patients aged 1-39 years. We re-tested negative and equivocal sera using a plaque reduction neutralization assay. We interpreted our results in the context of Ontario's immunization program and vaccine coverage data. Of 1,199 sera, 1035 (86.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 84.4, 88.2) were above the measles threshold for protection, 70 (5.8%, 95% CI 4.5, 7.2) were equivocal and 94 (7.8%, 95% CI 6.3, 9.4) were negative. The proportion of positive sera was highest for those 1-5 years, with 180/199 (90.5%, 95% CI 86.4, 94.5) positive sera, and lowest for those age 12-19 years, at 158/199 (79.4%, 95% CI 73.8, 85.0). Adjusted for age, females were more likely than males to have antibody titers above the threshold of protection (odds ratio = 1.60, 95% CI 1.14, 2.24). Most of the study cohort were eligible for two measles vaccine doses, and vaccine uptake in Ontario is >90% for school-aged cohorts. We observed a higher than expected proportion of sera with antibody levels below the threshold of protection, suggesting that immunity in some Ontario age-groups may be waning, despite high vaccine coverage. Alternatively, the traditional measles correlates of protection may not be an appropriate measure of population protection in measles-eliminated settings.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".