MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2980087720 · doi:10.5864/d2019-020

Prospects of leveraging an existing mosquito-borne disease surveillance system to monitor other emerging mosquito-borne diseases: a systematic review of West Nile Virus surveillance in Canada (2000–2016)

2019· review· en· W2980087720 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Luckrezia Awuor, Richard Meldrum, Eric N. Liberda

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Review · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWest Nile virusPreparednessPublic health surveillancePublic healthDisease surveillanceGovernment (linguistics)Environmental healthEpidemiological surveillanceGeographyMedicineVirologyPolitical scienceEpidemiologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this paper was to characterize the role of the current West Nile Virus (WNV) surveillance in supporting the identification of and public health preparedness for other emerging mosquito-borne diseases in Canada. We systematically reviewed publicly accessible WNV surveillance records published within the federal, provincial (n = 10), territorial (n = 3), and regional health authorities (n = 95) between 2000 and 2016. We describe the strategic approaches and activities to WNV surveillance from 124 websites, four public health databases, and three custom Google search engines. WNV surveillance in Canada can address emerging mosquito-borne diseases. However, surveillance practices are likely to underestimate the true risks. Prioritizing and strengthening WNV surveillance by all levels of the Canadian Government through timely surveillance measures, consistent and representative data for accurate prediction of trends and risks are recommended.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0140.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Health Review→Same topicMosquito-borne diseases and control→French-language works237,207→