A description of hepatitis C infection on Prince Edward Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Prince Edward Island (PEI), it was estimated that there were up to 800 people infected with Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) since testing began in 1991; however, the exact number of those still actively infected was not known. The purpose of this study was to determine (a) the prevalence of active HCV cases; (b) the number of acute/chronic cases at diagnosis; (c) the demographic/risk profile of HCV cases; and (d) the risk factors significant to the diagnosis of acute cases on PEI. This study used a descriptive, correlational, quantitative design using retrospective chart review data and laboratory data for all laboratory confirmed HCV cases living on PEI from 1991 to 2016. Approximately 430 cases remain actively infected on PEI. Intravenous drug use was the most prevalent risk factor, 65% of cases were diagnosed between 30 and 59 years of age, more males were diagnosed than females, and females (34 years) were diagnosed at a significantly younger age than males (37 years). Limited laboratory data allowed 388 cases to be diagnosed into acute and chronic cases. Eighteen percent were acute; 68% were chronic. The younger the case was in age the greater the probability of the case being acute. There are still many people on PEI who would benefit from HCV treatment. Development of a broader case definition for acute cases in PEI may improve the information available to identify at-risk people and plan action for prevention of HCV.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".