MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in sewage from buildings housing residents with different vulnerability levels

2023· article· en· W4319659851 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anna Pico-Tomàs, Cristina Mejías-Molina, Ian Zammit, Marta Rusiñol, Sílvia Bofill-Mas, Carles Borrego, Lluís Corominas

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Science of The Total Environment · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgència de Gestió d'Ajuts Universitaris i de RecercaFundació la Marató de TV3Generalitat de CatalunyaMonash UniversityCentres de Recerca de CatalunyaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsResidenceEnvironmental healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Transmission (telecommunications)Vulnerability (computing)Sampling (signal processing)SewageSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Environmental scienceScale (ratio)MedicineGeographyEnvironmental engineeringDiseaseComputer scienceDemographyTelecommunicationsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the last three years, various restrictions have been set up to limit the transmission of the Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19). While these rules apply at a large scale (e.g., country-wide level) human-to-human transmission of the virus that causes COVID-19, the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), occurs at a small scale. Different preventive policies and testing protocols were implemented in buildings where COVID-19 poses a threat (e.g., elderly residences) or constitutes a disruptive force (e.g., schools). In this study, we sampled sewage from different buildings (a school, a university campus, a university residence, and an elderly residence) that host residents of different levels of vulnerability. Our main goal was to assess the agreement between the SARS-CoV-2 concentration in wastewater and the policies applied in these buildings. All buildings were sampled using passive samplers while 24 h composite samples were also collected from the elderly residence. Results showed that passive samplers performed comparably well to composite samples while being cost-effective to keep track of COVID-19 prevalence. In the elderly residence, the comparison of sampling protocols (passive vs. active) combined with the strict clinical testing allowed us to compare the sensitivities of the two methods. Active sampling was more sensitive than passive sampling, as the former was able to detect a COVID-19 prevalence of 0.4 %, compared to a prevalence of 2.2 % for passive sampling. The number of COVID-19-positive individuals was tracked clinically in all the monitored buildings. More frequent detection of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater was observed in residential buildings than in non-residential buildings using passive samplers. In all buildings, sewage surveillance can be used to complement COVID-19 clinical testing regimes, as the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater remained positive even when no COVID-19-positive individuals were reported. Passive sampling is useful for building managers to adapt their COVID-19 mitigation policies.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations37
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Science of The Total EnvironmentSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207