Characterization of viral pathogens associated with symptomatic upper respiratory tract infection in adults during a low COVID-19 transmission period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The epidemiology of respiratory tract infections (RTI) has dramatically changed over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. A major effort in the clinical management of RTI has been directed toward diagnosing COVID-19, while the causes of other, common community RTI often remain enigmatic. To shed light on the etiological causes of RTI during a low COVID-19 transmission period in 2021, we did a pilot study using molecular testing for virologic causes of upper RTI among adults with respiratory symptoms from Almaty, Kazakhstan. Methods: = 50) was then tested for the presence of common RTI viruses and influenza A virus (IAV). Next generation virome sequencing was used to further characterize the PCR-detected RTI pathogens. Results: Of 1,812 symptomatic adults, 21 (1.2%) tested SARS-CoV-2-positive. Within the COVID-19 negative outpatient subset, 33/50 subjects (66%) had a positive PCR result for a common community RTI virus, consisting of human parainfluenza virus 3-4 (hPIV 3-4) in 25/50 (50%), rhinovirus (hRV) in 2 (4%), hPIV4-hRV co-infection in four (8%) and adenovirus or the OCR43/HKU-1 coronavirus in two (4%) cases; no IAV was detected. Virome sequencing allowed to reconstruct sequences of most PCR-identified rhinoviruses and hPIV-3/human respirovirus-3. Conclusions: COVID-19 was cause to a low proportion of symptomatic RTI among adults. Among COVID-negative participants, symptomatic RTI was predominantly associated with hPIV and hRV. Therefore, respiratory viruses other than SARS-CoV-2 should be considered in the clinical management and prevention of adult RTI in the post-pandemic era.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".