Ecology and Epidemiology of Tickborne Pathogens, Washington, USA, 2011–2016
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tickborne diseases are rare in Washington, USA, and the ecology of these pathogens is poorly understood. We integrated surveillance data from humans and ticks to better describe their epidemiology and ecology. During 2011-2016, a total of 202 tickborne disease cases were reported in Washington residents. Of these, 68 (34%) were autochthonous, including cases of Lyme disease, Rocky Mountain spotted fever, tickborne relapsing fever, and tularemia. During May 2011-December 2016, we collected 977 host-seeking ticks, including Ixodes pacificus, I. angustus, I. spinipalpis, I. auritulus, Dermacentor andersoni, and D. variabilis ticks. The prevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto in I. pacificus ticks was 4.0%; of B. burgdorferi sensu lato, 3.8%; of B. miyamotoi, 4.4%; and of Anaplasma phagocytophilum, 1.9%. We did not detect Rickettsia rickettsii in either Dermacentor species. Case-patient histories and detection of pathogens in field-collected ticks indicate that several tickborne pathogens are endemic to Washington.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".