MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309264283 · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010649

Molecular source attribution

2022· article· en· W4309264283 on OpenAlexafffund
Elisa Chao, Connor Chato, Reid Vender, Abayomi S. Olabode, Roux-Cil Ferreira, Art F. Y. Poon

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Computational Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAttributionOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)PopulationBiologyInferenceDiseaseTransmission (telecommunications)Computer scienceComputational biologyEvolutionary biologyGeneticsMedicineEnvironmental healthArtificial intelligenceVirologyPsychologyPathologyTelecommunicationsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the field of epidemiology, source attribution refers to a category of methods with the objective of reconstructing the transmission of an infectious disease from a specific source, such as a population, individual, or location.For example, source attribution methods may be used to trace the origin of a new pathogen that recently crossed from another host species into humans, or from one geographic region to another.It may be used to determine the common source of an outbreak of a foodborne infectious disease, such as a contaminated water supply.Finally, source attribution may be used to estimate the probability that an infection was transmitted from one specific individual to another, i.e., "who infected whom".Source attribution can play an important role in public health surveillance and management of infectious disease outbreaks.In practice, it tends to be a problem of statistical inference, because transmission events are seldom observed directly and may have occurred in the distant past.Thus, there is an unavoidable level of uncertainty when reconstructing transmission events from residual evidence, such as the spatial distribution of the disease.As a result, source attribution models often employ Bayesian methods that can accommodate substantial uncertainty in model parameters.Molecular source attribution is a subfield of source attribution that uses the molecular characteristics of the pathogen -most often its nucleic acid genome -to reconstruct transmission events.Many infectious diseases are routinely detected or characterized through genetic sequencing, which can be faster than culturing isolates in a reference laboratory and can identify specific strains of the pathogen at substantially higher precision than laboratory assays, such as antibody-based assays or drug susceptibility tests.On the other hand, analyzing the genetic (or whole genome) sequence data requires specialized computational methods to fit models of transmission.Consequently, molecular source attribution is a highly interdisciplinary area of molecular epidemiology that incorporates concepts and skills from mathematical statistics and modeling, microbiology, public health and computational biology.There are generally two ways that molecular data are used for source attribution.First, infections can be categorized into different "subtypes" that each corresponds to a unique molecular variety, or a cluster of similar varieties.Source attribution can then be inferred from the similarity of subtypes.Individual infections that belong to the same subtype are more likely to be related epidemiologically, including direct source-recipient transmission, because they have not substantially evolved away from their common ancestor.Similarly, we assume the true source population will have frequencies of subtypes that are more similar to the recipient population, relative to other potential sources.Second, molecular (genetic) sequences from

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.104
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.104
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0110.008
Open science0.0060.009
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2650.165

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 head0.234
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS Computational BiologySame topicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiologyFrench-language works237,207