Estimating the Incidence and Economic Cost of Lyme Disease Cases in Canada in the 21st Century with Projected Climate Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: ). OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to estimate future LD incidence in Canada, and economic costs, for the 21st century with projected climate change. METHODS: were projected from temperature output of the North American Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment regional climate model ensemble using greenhouse gas Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) 4.5 and 8.5. Once regions became climatically suitable for ticks, an algorithm derived from tick and LD case surveillance data projected subsequent increasing LD incidence. Three scenarios (optimistic, intermediate, and pessimistic) for maximum incidence at endemicity were selected based on LD surveillance, and underreporting estimates, from the United States. Health care and productivity cost estimates of LD cases were obtained from the literature. RESULTS: a year by 2050. There was little difference in projected incidence and economic cost between RCPs, and from 2050 to 2100, because projected climate up to 2050 is similar for RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 (mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions captured in RCP4.5 does not impact climate before the 2050s) and by 2050 the most densely populated areas of the study region are projected to be climatically suitable for ticks. CONCLUSIONS: Future incidence and economic costs of LD in Canada are likely to be substantial, but uncertainties remain. Because densely populated areas of Canada are projected to become endemic under conservative climate change scenarios, mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions is unlikely to provide substantial health co-benefits for LD. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP13759.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".