COVID-19 in a remote First Nations community in British Columbia, Canada: an outbreak report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In April 2020, British Columbia experienced its first outbreak of COVID-19 in a remote First Nations community. The objective of this paper was to describe the outbreak, including epidemiological and laboratory findings, and the public health response. METHODS: This report summarizes an outbreak of COVID-19 on Cormorant Island, British Columbia, in March and April 2020. Confirmed cases underwent investigation and contact tracing. Supports were provided to ensure successful isolation and quarantine for cases and contacts. Messaging to the community was circulated by trusted community members. Descriptive and social network analyses were conducted to describe the outbreak as it evolved. All case specimens underwent whole-genome sequencing. RESULTS: Thirty cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified. Those infected had a median age of 34 years (range 15-77), and the majority identified as female (19, 63%) and as First Nations (27, 90%). The most common symptoms included chills, cough, diarrhea, headache and fever. Five people were hospitalized (17%) and 1 died (3%). Percent positivity in the community was 18%. Transmission occurred primarily during evening social gatherings and within households. Two weeks after control measures were initiated, no further cases were identified. All cases were genetically related by 2 single nucleotide polymorphisms or fewer, and they belonged to the most dominant SARS-CoV-2 lineage present in British Columbia in April 2020. INTERPRETATION: A community-led response was essential for the effective containment of this outbreak that included 30 cases, preventing onward transmission of the virus. Lessons learned from the management of this outbreak can inform response to other similar outbreaks in First Nations communities across Canada.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".