Estimated prevalence of hepatitis B and C among immigrants in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Canada's Sexually Transmitted and Blood-borne Infections (STBBI) Action Plan and the Global Health Sector Strategies on STBBI highlight the importance of putting people at the centre of the health system response. Several key populations are disproportionately affected by viral hepatitis, including immigrants. However, there is a limited body of evidence on the burden of viral hepatitis among immigrants in Canada. We seek to address this gap by estimating the prevalence of hepatitis B (HBV) and C (HCV) infections among immigrants in Canada. Methods: Using country- and region-specific publicly available data on the prevalence of HBV and HCV, we estimated the number of immigrants with chronic HBV (CHB), HCV antibodies, and chronic HCV (CHC) by multiplying the number of immigrants from Statistics Canada's 2021 census of population data by the corresponding publicly available country or region-of-origin prevalence, including lower and upper bounds. Each country was categorized as low (<2%) or intermediate-to-high (≥2%) based on published prevalence. To capture changes over time, estimates were stratified by time-period, where possible. Results: In 2021, the estimated prevalence of viral hepatitis among all immigrants was 4.03% for CHB, 1.43% for HCV antibodies, and 0.78% for CHC. The estimated prevalence of CHB, HCV antibodies, and CHC was 0.91%, 0.96% and 0.52%, respectively, among immigrants from low-prevalence countries (<2%). It was 5.57%, 4.04%, and 2.20%, respectively, among immigrants from intermediate-to-high-prevalence countries (≥2%). Conclusion: This is the first study to estimate the burden of HBV and HCV among immigrants at the national level in Canada. The results show that the prevalence of viral hepatitis among immigrants is higher than the general Canadian population. However, grouping all immigrants into one category masks important variation, and potentially over-estimates the burden of HBV and HCV among immigrants. Strengthening our understanding of hepatitis prevalence among immigrants can improve our ability to connect those in need to care and treatment services.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".