MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161221184 · doi:10.1089/fpd.2020.2918

Area-Level Clustering of Shiga Toxin–Producing <i>Escherichia coli</i> Infections and Their Socioeconomic and Demographic Factors in Ontario, Canada: An Ecological Study

2021· article· en· W3161221184 on OpenAlexaffabout
Csaba Varga, Patience John, Martin Cooke, Shannon E. Majowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueFoodborne Pathogens and Disease · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicData-Driven Disease Surveillance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusCluster (spacecraft)Scan statisticDemographyLogistic regressionOddsOdds ratioPoisson regressionGeographyPopulationEnvironmental healthMedicineStatisticsComputer sciencePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(STEC) infections are an important health burden for human populations in Ontario and worldwide. We assessed 452 STEC cases that were reported to Ontario's reportable disease surveillance system between 2015 and 2017. A retrospective scan statistic using a Poisson model was used to detect high-rate STEC clusters at the forward sortation area (FSA; the first three digits of a postal code) level. A significant spatial cluster in the southwest region of Ontario was identified. A case-case logistic regression analysis was applied to compare FSA-level socioeconomic and demographic characteristics among STEC cases included inside the spatial cluster with cases outside of the cluster. Cases included in the spatial cluster had higher odds of living in FSAs with a low median family income, low proportion of lone-parent families, and low proportion of the visible minority population. In addition, STEC cases inside the cluster had higher odds of coming from rural FSAs. Our study demonstrated that STEC cases were spatially clustered in Ontario and their clustering was associated with FSA-level socioeconomic and demographic determinants of cases.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFoodborne Pathogens and DiseaseSame topicData-Driven Disease SurveillanceFrench-language works237,207