MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lessons from CanSpotASF: Moving towards risk-based African Swine Fever surveillance with rule-out testing in Western Canada

2024· article· en· W4393375184 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jette Christensen, Yanyun Huang, Glen Duizer

Bibliographic record

VenuePreventive Veterinary Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsDiagnostic Services ManitobaResearch ManitobaHealth PEI
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDisease surveillanceHerdAfrican swine feverAfrican swine fever virusSerologyDiseaseVeterinary medicineFamily medicinePathologyVirologyVirusImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

African swine fewer (ASF) is a serious disease present in Africa, Eurasia, and the Caribbean but not in continental North America. CanSpotASF describes the ASF surveillance in Canada as a phased in approach. The first enhancement to the passive surveillance was the risk-based early detection testing (rule-out testing) where eligible cases were tested for ASF virus (ASFv). The objective was to describe how the eligibility criteria were applied to cases in western Canada. In particular, to assess if cases tested for ASFv had eligible conditions and if pathology cases with eligible conditions were tested for ASFv based on the data collated by Canada West Swine Health Intelligence Network (CWSHIN) from British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. The study period was August 2020 to December 2022 and the data included two study laboratories. We found that over 90% of cases tested for ASFv had eligible conditions as defined in CanSpotASF. The eligibility criteria were applied at three stages of the disease investigation process: 1) the clinical presentation in the herd; 2) at the initial laboratory assessment; and 3) the final pathology diagnosis. At the two study laboratories the proportion of all submitted cases (culture, serology, PCR, pathology) tested for ASFv was very low 1%. However, in the pathology cases specifically targeted in CanSpotASF, and the proportion of tested cases was 12%. In addition, for eligible pathology cases (eligible diagnosis or test) the proportion tested was higher 15%. These results indicated that CanSpotASF targeted herds with submissions for pathological examination and to some degree eligible conditions which would be herds with health issues (known or unknown). We interpret this as a first step towards risk-based surveillance with health as the defining factor.

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)0.000
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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreventive Veterinary MedicineSame topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207