MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022441707 · doi:10.1101/2020.05.02.20086314

Testing lags and emerging COVID-19 outbreaks in federal penitentiaries: A view from Canada

2020· preprint· en· W3022441707 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandra Blair, Abtin Parnia, Arjumand Siddiqi

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutbreakPopulationCase fatality ratePrisonDemographyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)GeographyMedicineEnvironmental healthVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives To provide the first known comprehensive analysis of COVID-19 outcomes in a federal penitentiary system. We examined the following COVID-19 outcomes within federal penitentiaries in Canada and contrasted them with estimates for the overall population in the penitentiaries’ respective provincial jurisdictions: testing, prevalence, the proportion recovered, and fatality. Methods Data for prisons were obtained from the Correctional Service of Canada and, for the general population, from the Esri COVID-19 Canadian Outbreak Tracking Hub. Data were retrieved between March 30 and April 21, 2020, and are accurate to this date. Penitentiary-, province- and sex-specific frequency statistics for each outcome were calculated. Results Data on 50 of 51 penitentiaries (98%) were available. Of these, 72% of penitentiaries reported fewer tests per 1000 population than the Canadian general population average (16 tests/1000 population), and 24% of penitentiaries reported zero tests. Penitentiaries with high levels of testing were those that already had elevated COVID-19 prevalence. Five penitentiaries reported an outbreak (at least one case). Hardest hit penitentiaries were those in Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia, with some prisons reporting COVID-19 prevalence of 30% to 40%. Of these, two were women’s prisons. Female prisoners were over-represented among cases (31% of cases overall, despite representing 5% of the total prison population). Conclusion Increased sentinel or universal testing may be appropriate given the confined nature of prison populations. This, along with rigorous infection prevention control practices and the potential release of prisoners, will be needed to curb current outbreaks and those likely to come. GRAPHICAL SUMMARY Between 20% and 57% fewer tests per 1000 population have been conducted in federal prisons in Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Alberta than in the general population of those provinces. Though Alberta, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia are reporting lower counts of COVID-19 cases, these are also the regions reporting the lowest levels of testing. Case incidence has been highest in federal prisons in Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia, where a total of five prisons are experiencing outbreaks (1 or more cases). These regions are those reporting the highest levels of testing – higher than the testing levels in the general population.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207