Epidemiology of ticks submitted from human hosts in Alberta, Canada (2000–2019)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The geographic range and occurrence of tick species is dynamic. This has important public health implications due to important tick species that can transmit pathogens. This study presents a retrospective review of tick genera recovered from humans and submitted for identification in Alberta, Canada, over a 19-year period. The total number of ticks and proportion of genera were analyzed over time. Molecular testing for a number of pathogens associated with Ixodes scapularis and I. pacificus was conducted. A total of 2,358 ticks were submitted between 2000 and 2019, with 98.6% being acquired in Alberta. The number of ticks submitted increased significantly over time (p < 0.0001). Dermacentor ticks were the most abundant genus, followed by Ixodes and Amblyomma. There was a significant decrease in the proportion of Dermacentor ticks between 2013 and 2019 (p = 0.02), with a corresponding increase in the proportion of Ixodes ticks over the same time (p = 0.04). No statistically significant change in seasonality was identified. Borrelia burgdorferi was detected in 8/76 (10.5%; 95% CI 5.4–19.4%) of all I. scapularis and I. pacificus ticks submitted. This translated to a B. burgdorferi positivity of 0.35% (95% CI 0.15–0.68%) among all ticks received. Dermacentor species (especially D. andersoni) remains the most common tick feeding on humans in Alberta. Small numbers of vector species (including I. scapularis/pacificus) are encountered annually over widely separated geographic areas in the province. The risk of exposure to tick-borne pathogens (e.g. Lyme disease) in Alberta remains low.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".