Comparison of PCV10, PCV13, PCV15, PCV20 and PPSV23 vaccine coverage of invasive <i>Streptococcus pneumoniae</i> isolate serotypes in Canada: the SAVE study, 2011–20
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As pneumococci evolve under vaccine, antimicrobial and other selective pressures, it is important to track isolates covered by established (PCV10, PCV13 and PPSV23) and new (PCV15 and PCV20) vaccine formulations. OBJECTIVES: To compare invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) isolates from serotypes covered by PCV10, PCV13, PCV15, PCV20 and PPSV23, collected in Canada from 2011 to 2020, by demographic category and antimicrobial resistance phenotype. METHODS: IPD isolates from the SAVE study were initially collected by members of the Canadian Public Health Laboratory Network (CPHLN) as part of a collaboration between the Canadian Antimicrobial Resistance Alliance (CARA) and the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC). Serotypes were determined by quellung reaction, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the CLSI broth microdilution method. RESULTS: A total of 14 138 invasive isolates were collected from 2011 to 2020, with 30.7% of isolates covered by the PCV13 vaccine, 43.6% of isolates covered by the PCV15 vaccine (including 12.9% non-PCV13 serotypes 22F and 33F), and 62.6% of isolates covered by the PCV20 vaccine (including 19.0% non-PCV15 serotypes 8, 10A, 11A, 12F and 15B/C). Non-PCV20 serotypes 2, 9N, 17F and 20, but not 6A (present in PPSV23) represented 8.8% of all IPD isolates. Higher-valency vaccine formulations covered significantly more isolates by age, sex, region and resistance phenotype including MDR isolates. Coverage of XDR isolates did not significantly differ between vaccine formulations. CONCLUSIONS: When compared with PCV13 and PCV15, PCV20 covered significantly more IPD isolates stratified by patient age, region, sex, individual antimicrobial resistance phenotypes and MDR phenotype.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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, 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".