MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032893735 · doi:10.1139/facets-2019-0066

Bat bites and rabies: the Canadian scene

2020· article· en· W3032893735 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
M. Brock Fenton, Alan C. Jackson, Paul A. Faure

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicRabies epidemiology and control
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of ManitobaWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRabiesBitingRabies virusRhabdoviridaeAnimal BitesLyssavirusWildlifeVirologyPost-exposure prophylaxisMedicineBiologyVeterinary medicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bats are susceptible to rabies. Although bats may appear to be asymptomatic carriers of rabies for a few days, eventually they fall ill to the viral infection and die. Two of at least four bat-specific variants of rabies virus in Canada have killed humans. Rabies is usually transmitted by biting, but bats are small mammals so their bites may go unnoticed. People exposed to rabid animals should receive postexposure prophylaxis (PEP). With 60 known human deaths from 1950 to 2009, rabies is rare in Canada and the United States of America compared with India where it kills over 100 people annually. In Asia and Africa, most human rabies is acquired from dog bites. In Brazil, dog and bat bites together account for >80% of human rabies. In Canada, rabies is a disease primarily confined to wildlife (foxes, racoons, skunks, and bats). The public image of bats is negatively affected by their association with diseases. Too often bats are victimized by allegations of their role in deadly diseases such as rabies, Ebola, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). In general, bats are not dangerous, but humans should seek treatment if they are bitten by one. (Graphical abstract shows a 4-g elegant myotis biting MBF’s finger—photo by Sherri and Brock Fenton.)

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.003

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicRabies epidemiology and controlFrench-language works237,207