The role of prisons in disseminating tuberculosis in Brazil: a genomic epidemiology study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Globally, prisons are high-incidence settings for tuberculosis. Yet the role of prisons as reservoirs of M. tuberculosis , propagating epidemics through spillover from prisons to surrounding communities, has been difficult to measure directly. Methods and Findings To quantify the role of prisons in driving wider community M. tuberculosis transmission, we conducted prospective genomic surveillance in Central West Brazil from 2014 to 2019. We whole genome sequenced 1,152 M. tuberculosis isolates collected during active and passive surveillance inside and outside prisons and linked genomes to detailed incarceration histories. We applied multiple phylogenetic and genomic clustering approaches and inferred timed transmission trees. We found that M. tuberculosis sequences from incarcerated and non-incarcerated people were closely related in a maximum likelihood phylogeny. The majority (70.8%; 46/65) of genomic clusters including people with no incarceration history also included individuals with a recent history of incarceration. Among cases in individuals with no incarceration history, 50.6% (162/320) were in clusters that included individuals with recent incarceration history, suggesting that transmission chains often span prisons and communities. We identified a minimum of 18 highly probable spillover events, M. tuberculosis transmission from people with a recent incarceration history to people with no prior history of incarceration, occurring in the state’s four largest cities and across sampling years. We additionally found that frequent transfers of people between the state’s prisons creates a highly connected prison network that likely disseminates M. tuberculosis across the state. Conclusions We developed a framework for measuring spillover from high-incidence environments to surrounding communities by integrating genomic and spatial information to reconstruct tuberculosis transmission chains. Our findings indicate that, in this setting, prisons serve not only as disease reservoirs, but also disseminate M. tuberculosis across highly connected prison networks, both amplifying and propagating M. tuberculosis risk in surrounding communities.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".