MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210332216 · doi:10.47339/ephj.2021.201

Assessing knowledge and preventive behavior of BC hikers towards Lyme disease

2021· article· en· W4210332216 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Goodraz Nategh, Dale Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueBCIT Environmental Public Health Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
KeywordsLyme diseaseDiseaseStatistical softwareDemographyMedicineEnvironmental healthGeographyPsychologyGerontologyComputer scienceImmunologyData sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundIn Canada, recent data shows that Lyme diseases (LD) have increased in many different regions of the country. British Columbia (BC), with its natural beauty and suitable terrain for outdoor activities, has drawn thousands of hikers to the established hiking trails, as well as off–trail wilderness. Consequently, more people are expected to be exposed to Lyme disease every year. For better understanding of the risk, study of their knowledge and awareness, and also their preventative behavior against Lyme disease is necessary. The purpose of our study is to evaluate hiker awareness about LD and assess type and frequency of preventive measures they take against the disease.MethodsA self-administered electronic survey was created and disseminated online among hikers in British Columbia, Canada. The online survey distributed via the social platform, Reddit, and took approximately five minutes to complete. The results were collected and organized in Microsoft Excel and analyzed with NCSS statistical software (NCSS, 2021).ResultsThe results of this study indicated that general awareness of LD among hikers in British Columbia is high. Ninety-eight percent of participants in the study have heard about the LD before the study was conducted. Hikers are generally aware of the prevalence of the disease (83%) in BC and know that ticks are problematic for them (74%). Majority of hikers (92%) have taken at least one measure to protect themselves against the disease. Avoiding tall grasses and bushwalking while hiking was the most popular method as 46% of the hikers frequently (more than half the time) took this measure. In contrast, wearing protective cloths or tucking pants into socks were the least frequent methods taken by them. Also, 68% of the hikers never used chemical insect repellent to deter ticks. This result suggests that avoiding ticks and tick bites by avoiding grassy areas, where ticks might be present, is the preferred method over the usage of chemical insect repellants, or physical barriers against tick bites such as wearing protective cloths or tucking pants into the socks; however, further data is needed to precisely conclude this result.Our study found that there are no significant statistical associations between hiker's knowledge and their level of education (P= 0.77), hiker's education level and preventive method taken (P=0.91), level of hiking experience and preventive method taken (P=0.86) or gender of the hikers and preventive methods taken (P=0.068) against the Lyme disease.ConclusionsAs Lyme disease has been recognized as a potentially increasing infectious disease in British Columbia, assessment of hiker's knowledge and preventive behavior towards LD through an online survey concluded that BC hikers have high level of awareness about the disease, and they protect themselves against the tick bites. As predictive models show that climate change and warmer weather cause an expansion in tick habitat in North America, probability of hikers being exposed to ticks is higher. As the risk increases, LD prevention campaigns could be designed considering what prevention methods are the most popular; and more effective or innovative prevention methods could be introduced to the population. Health authorities may introduce LD prevention initiatives and educational plans that are adaptable and suitable to the geographical region based on prevalence of the disease. Similarly hiking groups may educate their new members regarding the disease, how to prevent it and what methods are suitable based on the region they are active in.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBCIT Environmental Public Health JournalSame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207