Bartonella quintana Infection in Canada: A Retrospective Laboratory Study and Systematic Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background:Bartonella quintana is a body-louse-borne bacterium. Canadian B. quintana disease has been reported primarily in populations experiencing homelessness and in Indigenous communities with limited access to water. We sought to understand the epidemiology of B. quintana in Canada. Methods: This study combined an analysis of laboratory data from Canada’s National Microbiology Laboratory (NML) with a systematic review of the literature. Laboratory data included quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) cycle threshold values and indirect immunofluorescent antibody titers with the year and province of the sample acquisition. For the systematic review, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science for articles published before 15 July 2024, with terms related to B. quintana in Canada. Results: Thirty-three individuals with qPCR-positive B. quintana were documented in seven provinces and one territory. The number of cases increased over time (p-value = 0.005), with the greatest number of cases being reported in 2022 and 2023. The percent positivity for the B. quintana qPCR performed at the NML increased over time (p-value = 0.036). The median immunoglobulin G titer demonstrated a sustained increase starting in 2017. The systematic review identified fourteen individuals with qPCR-positive B. quintana (none had a qPCR performed at the NML) and seven probable cases of B. quintana disease. Four of these twenty-one individuals from the systematic review died (19%). All fatalities were attributed to endocarditis. Conclusions: The detection of B. quintana disease in seven provinces and one territory suggests that B. quintana has a national distribution. B. quintana disease is increasingly diagnosed in Canada, indicating ongoing transmission across geographic settings.
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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.021 | 0.030 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".