MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200494372 · doi:10.1093/infdis/jiab608

Impact of COVID-19 on Tuberculosis Prevention and Treatment in Canada: A Multicenter Analysis of 10 833 Patients

2021· article· en· W4200494372 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Coralie Geric, Mariane Saroufim, David Landsman, Jonathan Richard, Andrea Benedetti, Jane Batt, Sarah K. Brode, Faiz Ahmad Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWest Park Healthcare CentreToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMcGill UniversitySt. Michael's HospitalMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
KeywordsTuberculosisMedicinePandemicLatent tuberculosisActive tuberculosisCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Public healthSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakInternal medicineVirologyMycobacterium tuberculosisOutbreakPathologyDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We assessed the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on treatment of latent tuberculosis, and of active tuberculosis, at 3 centers in Montreal and Toronto, using data from 10 833 patients (8685 with latent tuberculosis infection, 2148 with active tuberculosis). Observation periods prior to declarations of COVID-19 public health emergencies ranged from 219 to 744 weeks, and after declarations, from 28 to 33 weeks. In the latter period, reductions in latent tuberculosis infection treatment initiation rates ranged from 30% to 66%. At 2 centers, active tuberculosis treatment rates fell by 16% and 29%. In Canada, cornerstone measures for tuberculosis elimination weakened during the COVID-19 pandemic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207