What Can Genetic Relatedness Tell Us About Risk Factors for Tuberculosis Transmission?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To stop tuberculosis (TB), the leading infectious cause of death globally, we need to better understand transmission risk factors. Although many studies have identified associations between individual-level covariates and pathogen genetic relatedness, few have identified characteristics of transmission pairs or explored how closely covariates associated with genetic relatedness mirror those associated with transmission. METHODS: We simulated a TB-like outbreak with pathogen genetic data and estimated odds ratios (ORs) to correlate each covariate and genetic relatedness. We used a naive Bayes approach to modify the genetic links and nonlinks to resemble the true links and nonlinks more closely and estimated modified ORs with this approach. We compared these two sets of ORs with the true ORs for transmission. Finally, we applied this method to TB data in Hamburg, Germany, and Massachusetts, USA, to find pair-level covariates associated with transmission. RESULTS: Using simulations, we found that associations between covariates and genetic relatedness had the same relative magnitudes and directions as the true associations with transmission, but biased absolute magnitudes. Modifying the genetic links and nonlinks reduced the bias and increased the confidence interval widths, more accurately capturing error. In Hamburg and Massachusetts, pairs were more likely to be probable transmission links if they lived in closer proximity, had a shorter time between observations, or had shared ethnicity, social risk factors, drug resistance, or genotypes. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a method to improve the use of genetic relatedness as a proxy for transmission, and aid in understanding TB transmission dynamics in low-burden settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".