Listeriosis in infants: Prospective surveillance studies in Canada and Switzerland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: International data on listeriosis during infancy from large populations are essential to guide evidence-based empiric antibiotic guidelines for sepsis in infancy. We aimed to determine the incidence, clinical manifestations, and outcome of listeriosis in infants <6 months of age in Canada and Switzerland. METHODS: Prospective, active surveillance of listeriosis in infants <6 months of age was conducted through the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program (May 2015 to April 2017) and the Swiss Paediatric Surveillance Unit (April 2017 to March 2018). Confirmed and probable cases were included. RESULTS: In Canada, eight sporadic listeriosis cases were reported (incidence, 1.1/100,000 live births/year). In Switzerland, four cases were reported (incidence, 4.5/100,000 live births/year) of which three were part of a confirmed outbreak with an unclear source. In the two countries, eight of the 12 cases (66.6%) presented as early-onset disease (within the first 7 days of life) and none presented after 28 days life. CONCLUSIONS: Neonatal listeriosis is rare. Infants presenting with sepsis, especially after 4 weeks of life, may not routinely require empiric antibiotic coverage for listeriosis. Outbreak-related cases still occur. Continued surveillance is important.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".