A Method to Create Directed Acyclic Graphs from Cycles of Transmission of Zoonotic and Vector-Borne Infectious Agents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The life cycles of zoonotic and vector-borne diseases can be complex. This complexity makes it challenging to identify factors that confound the association between an exposure of interest and infection in one of the susceptible hosts. In epidemiology, directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) can be used to visualize the relationships between exposures and outcomes and also to identify which factors confound the association between exposure and the outcome of interest. However, DAGs can only be used in situations where no cycle exists in the causal relationships being represented. This is problematic for infectious agents that cycle between hosts. Zoonoses and vector-borne diseases pose additional challenges with DAG construction since multiple required or optional hosts of different species may be part of the cycle. Methods: We review the existing examples of DAGs created for nonzoonotic infectious agents. We then demonstrate how to cut the transmission cycle to create DAGs where infection of a specific host species is the outcome of interest. We adapt our method to create DAGs using examples of transmission and host characteristics common to many zoonotic and vector-borne infectious agents. Results: We demonstrate our method using the transmission cycle of West Nile virus to create a simple transmission DAG that lacks a cycle. Conclusions: Using our work, investigators can create DAGs to help identify confounders of the relationships between modifiable risk factors and infection. Ultimately, a better understanding and control of confounding in measuring the impact of such risk factors can be used to inform health policy, guide public health and animal health interventions, and uncover gaps needing further research attention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".