MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7035932647

Analysis of simulated outbreak data and spatial analysis of highly pathogenic avian influenza for preparedness planning and policy

2012· article· en· W7035932647 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueIslandScholar (University of Prince Edward Island) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLiterature, Politics, and Exile Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutbreakNegative binomial distributionInfluenza A virus subtype H5N1Regression analysisPreparednessCount dataRegressionHighly pathogenic
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first objective of this research was to develop and evaluate an approach to analyze and communicate the results of a large number of simulated outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) to decision-makers and policy-makers, using the North American Animal Disease Spread Model (NAADSM), and to make recommendations on the most effective HPAI control policy for Ontario, Canada, specifically, on the effect of stamping-out and ring-culling strategies on the magnitude of an HPAI outbreak. Negative binomial regression analysis was used to identify significant predictors of the number of farms infected for each scenario. Interaction plots were developed from the output of the negative binomial regression analysis, to facilitate communication of simulation results to policy-makers and to analyze the relationship between movement restrictions and destruction strategy. Negative binomial regression analysis was appropriate for handling the right-skewed count data of the simulated HPAI outbreaks in Ontario, while interaction plots were an appropriate visualization tool for communication to policy-makers. For policy development, the modeling results suggested that stamping-out of the infected/detected flocks, without ring-culling, in combination with movement restrictions on direct and indirect contacts, would be the most appropriate policy for Ontario.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIslandScholar (University of Prince Edward Island)Same topicLiterature, Politics, and Exile StudiesFrench-language works237,207