MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987016261 · doi:10.1017/s0950268819001870

An outbreak of hepatitis A in Canada: The use of a control bank to conduct a case-control study

2019· article· en· W2987016261 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Courtney R. Smith, Tanis Kershaw, Karen Johnson, Kashmeera Meghnath

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Infection · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlPublic Health OntarioPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersHealth CanadaBritish Columbia Centre for Disease ControlNova Scotia Department of Health and WellnessPublic Health AgencyDepartment of Health, Western Cape GovernmentOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareMinistère de la SantéCanadian Food Inspection AgencyMinistère de la Santé et des Services sociauxPublic Health Agency of CanadaAlberta Health Services
KeywordsOutbreakLandlineMedicineOdds ratioCase-control studyPhoneMultivariate analysisDemographyVirologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An outbreak of 18 cases of hepatitis A virus infection across five Canadian provinces was investigated. Case onsets occurred between October 2017 and May 2018. A retrospective matched case-control study was conducted to identify the likely source of the outbreak. Three matched controls were recruited for each case using a previously established control bank, supplemented by landline and cell phone call lists. Univariate and multivariate matched analyses were conducted to identify a potential outbreak source. Seventy-two per cent of controls were recruited through the control bank, and required on average 25.5 calls per recruited control; 20% of controls were recruited through a landline sample and 8% of controls were recruited through a cell phone sample, requiring an average of 847.3 and 331.7 calls per recruited control, respectively. Results of the analysis pointed to shrimp/prawns (odds ratio (OR) 15.75, p = 0.01) and blackberries (OR 7.21, p = 0.02) as foods of interest, however, an outbreak source could not be confirmed. The control bank proved to be a more efficient method for control recruitment than random call lists. Expanding the control bank size and using alternative methods, such as online surveys, may prove beneficial for increasing the timeliness of a case-control study during an outbreak investigation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and InfectionSame topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207