MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4296782688 · doi:10.1093/pch/21.supp5.e71c

Rotavirus Genotypes Circulating in Ontario, Canada, Before and After the Implementation of the Immunization Program, 2010-2013

2016· article· en· W4296782688 on OpenAlexaffabout
S Isabel, RR Higgins, A Peci, S L. Deeks, Jonathan B. Gubbay

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiology
Canadian institutionsToronto Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRotavirusGenotypingRotavirus vaccineVaccinationGenotypeVirologyImmunizationMultiplexMedicineImmunization programPediatricsBiologyVirusImmunologyGeneAntibodyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND: Rotavirus A is a common cause of acute gastroenteritis in young children and a significant cause of death worldwide. Rotavirus shows an impressive genetic diversity and its epidemiological surveillance is typically conducted with a binary genotyping system using two major outer capsid antigenic protein genes: G (VP7 gene) and P (VP4 gene). Ontario introduced a publicly funded vaccination program for two and four month old infants for rotavirus in August 2011, using Rotarix® (GlaxoSmithKline), a live monovalent oral vaccine which contains an attenuated G1P[8] strain. Rotavirus vaccination has diminished the magnitude of rotavirus seasons in many countries but it is unclear if it will contribute to selective pressure and increase the prevalence of other genotypes. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to describe circulating rotavirus genotypes before and after the implementation of Ontario’s immunization program. We monitored the potential change in relative proportions and emergence of rotavirus genotypes in Ontario after vaccination-program implementation. DESIGN/METHODS: Rotavirus detection was conducted at a public health laboratory using electronic microscopy, immunochromatographic testing, and/or laboratory developed multiplex rRT-PCR. A convenience sample of rotavirus positive stool specimens collected in children and adults in Ontario from September 2010 to June 2013 were genotyped using heminested genotyping multiplex PCR. We also searched Pubmed in November 2015 for articles published on rotavirus G10 since 2008. RESULTS: Of the 332 stool specimens collected, we found a decrease in the number of rotavirus positive specimens available for genotyping in the 23 month period post-vaccination (128 specimens) compared to the 11 month period pre-vaccination (204 specimens) in Ontario. We also found an increase in the proportion of genotype G10 in the post-vaccination period (37/128 = 29%) compared to the pre-vaccination period (11/204 = 5%). These G10 specimens originated from different regions of Ontario. Our literature review estimated that only approximately two hundred G10-positive human stool samples were reported from 14 different countries worldwide since 2008. CONCLUSION: Our study showed a decrease in the number of rotavi-rus positive convenience samples after vaccination-program implementation. We also found an unexpected increase of the proportion of rotavirus G10 after the introduction of the immunization program. Genotype G10 is uncommon in human and vaccine effectiveness for this genotype is unclear.Ongoing monitoring of rotavirus prevalence and circulating genotypes is important to study the long-term effect of vaccination and evaluate if this increase in proportion of genotype G10 is representative or persists in Ontario, or is present in other Canadian provinces or countries.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiology→French-language works237,207→