MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116039323 · doi:10.3201/eid2701.191650

Estimating the Force of Infection for Dengue Virus Using Repeated Serosurveys, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

2020· article· en· W3116039323 on OpenAlexafffund
Jacqueline Kyungah Lim, Mabel Carabalí, Tansy Edwards, Ahmed Barro, Jung-Seok Lee, Désiré Lucien Dahourou, Kang Sung Lee, Teguewende Nikiema, Mee‐Young Shin, Thérèse Kagone, Losseni Kaba, Suk Namkung, Paul‐André Somé, Jae Seung Yang, Valéry Ridde, In‐Kyu Yoon, Neâl Alexander, Seydou Yaro

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging infectious diseases · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEuropean and Developing Countries Clinical Trials PartnershipCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBill and Melinda Gates FoundationEuropean CommissionMedical Research CouncilDepartment for International Development
KeywordsMedicineSeroconversionOutbreakDengue feverSerologyDemographyDengue virusAttack rateVirologyImmunologyVirusAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because of limited data on dengue virus in Burkina Faso, we conducted 4 consecutive age-stratified longitudinal serologic surveys, ≈6 months apart, among persons 1-55 years of age, during June 2015-March 2017, which included a 2016 outbreak. The seroconversion rate before the serosurvey enrollment was estimated by binomial regression, taking age as the duration of exposure, and assuming constant force of infection (FOI) over age and calendar time. We calculated FOI between consecutive surveys and rate ratios for potentially associated characteristics based on seroconversion using the duration of intervals. Among 2,897 persons at enrollment, 66.3% were IgG-positive, and estimated annual FOI was 5.95%. Of 1,269 enrollees participating in all 4 serosurveys, 438 were IgG-negative at enrollment. The annualized FOI ranged from 10% to 20% (during the 2016 outbreak). Overall, we observed high FOI for dengue. These results could support decision-making about control and preventive measures for dengue.

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)0.001
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 score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerging infectious diseasesSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207