Legionnaires’ Disease Cases at a Large Community Hospital—Common and Underdiagnosed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Legionnaires’ disease (LD) is a severe pneumonia with a mortality rate of about 10%. The illness remains largely underdiagnosed with outbreaks occurring with alarming incidence. In this study, we assessed the frequency of Legionnaires’ disease among pneumonia cases treated at a large community hospital over a summer season. We invited all admitted patients diagnosed with pneumonia, able to provide a urine sample for an antigen test, presenting from May to October 2018, to enroll in our study; 35 patients were tested for the presence of Legionella. Out of 33 patients tested, 9 (28%) were positive for Legionella. Three sets of the 9 Legionella cases exhibited spatiotemporal clustering indicative of LD outbreaks. Only one of the 9 Legionella UAT-positive patients presented a sporadic case of LD. The number of pneumonia cases in our community confirmed to be LD was strikingly high (28%), compared to other survey studies that report between 3.7% and 14%. These results are consistent with previous knowledge that LD is underdiagnosed and support that routine testing should be considered for all possible LD cases, particularly in the summer months. Such testing is likely to prevent further cases of community acquired LD.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".