The Canadian 2014 porcine epidemic diarrhoea virus outbreak: Important risk factors that were not considered in the epidemiological investigation could change the conclusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The introduction and spread of porcine epidemic diarrhoea virus (PEDV) in North America resulted in significant death loss in the swine industry. As the industry learned how to manage this disease, many new risks were identified, including the potential for feed and feed ingredients to become contaminated and spread PEDV. In addition, biosecurity practices were reevaluated and strengthened throughout the industry. At the time of the outbreak epidemiologists did not understand, as well as they are understood today, all the risk factors that contribute to the spread of PEDV. As a result, the epidemiological investigations into the 2014 PEDV outbreak in eastern Canada may not have investigated all risk factors as thoroughly as they would be investigated today. In retrospect, many of the Bradford Hill criteria used to determine causation were not fulfilled. This review identifies risk factors that were not included in the 2014 epidemiology. If these risk factors were included in the epidemiology, the conclusions and determination of causation may have been different.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".