MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389208201 · doi:10.1093/infdis/jiad533

Preparing for Mpox Resurgence: Surveillance Lessons From Outbreaks in Toronto, Canada

2023· article· en· W4389208201 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Herveen Sachdeva, Rita Shahin, S. Ota, Sandra Isabel, Chand S. Mangat, Rebecca Stuart, Shovita Padhi, Allison Chris, Sharmistha Mishra, Darrell H. S. Tan, Tom Braukmann, Alireza Eshaghi, Edgard M. Mejia, Nikho Hizon, Michael Finkelstein

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesInstitute of Health Services and Policy ResearchSt. Michael's HospitalToronto Public HealthPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversité LavalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersPublic Health Agency of CanadaJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsOutbreakPreparednessEnvironmental healthMedicineVaccinationTransmission (telecommunications)GeographyVirologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: With many global jurisdictions, Toronto, Canada, experienced an mpox outbreak in spring/summer 2022. Cases declined following implementation of a large vaccination campaign. A surge in early 2023 led to speculation that asymptomatic and/or undetected local transmission was occurring in the city. METHODS: Mpox cases and positive laboratory results are reported to Toronto Public Health. Epidemic curves and descriptive risk factor summaries for the 2022 and 2023 outbreaks were generated. First- and second-dose vaccination was monitored. Mpox virus wastewater surveillance and whole genome sequencing were conducted to generate hypotheses about the source of the 2023 resurgence. RESULTS: An overall 515 cases were reported in spring/summer 2022 and 17 in the 2022-2023 resurgence. Wastewater data correlated with the timing of cases. Whole genome sequencing showed that 2022-2023 cases were distinct from 2022 cases and closer to sequences from another country, suggesting a new importation as a source. At the start of the resurgence, approximately 16% of first-dose vaccine recipients had completed their second dose. CONCLUSIONS: This investigation demonstrates the importance of ongoing surveillance and preparedness for mpox outbreaks. Undetected local transmission was not a likely source of the 2022-2023 resurgence. Ongoing preexposure vaccine promotion remains important to mitigate disease burden.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicPoxvirus research and outbreaksFrench-language works237,207