MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402585366 · doi:10.5864/d2024-013

Rabies in a domestic cat in Niagara: An environmental health perspective

2024· article· en· W4402585366 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Karin Fawcett, Joe DeGiuli

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicRabies epidemiology and control
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of Niagara
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRabiesPerspective (graphical)GeographyVirologyMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On Friday June 16, 2023 at 4:00 pm, Niagara Region Public Health & Emergency Services (NRPH&ES) received notification of a rabies positive result for a cat that they had submitted for rabies testing earlier that week. The investigation revealed that it was a domestic cat from an urban area in St. Catharines that had been around numerous people and other animals during its infectious period. As part of the follow-up, NRPH&ES contacted all potential exposures, coordinated vaccination for those that required it and collaborated with other agencies to ensure the safety of all those involved. In addition, NRPH&ES navigated working with vaccine hesitant clients who were uncooperative in providing details pertaining to people who may have been in contact with the rabid cat, other animals living in the household, and ultimately reluctant to receive rabies post exposure prophylaxis (rPEP). Through innovation, unconventional methods and deviation from standard practice, NRPH&ES was able to build a trusting relationship with all clients, gather the information they required to conduct a fulsome investigation, and vaccinate and confine the other animal exposed to the rabid cat.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Health ReviewSame topicRabies epidemiology and controlFrench-language works237,207