MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097679021

RESEARCH B Epidemiology of Burkholderia cepacia Complex in Patients

2013· article· en· W7097679021 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurkholderia cepacia complexCystic fibrosisBurkholderiaTypingMolecular epidemiologyBurkholderia cenocepaciaEpidemiologyLung infection
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Burkholderia cepacia complex is an important group of pathogens in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). Although evidence for patient-to-patient spread is clear, microbial factors facilitating transmission are poorly understood. To identify microbial clones with enhanced transmissibility, we evaluated B. cepacia complex isolates from patients with CF from throughout Canada. A total of 905 isolates from the B. cepacia complex were recovered from 447 patients in 8 of the 10 provinces; 369 (83%) of these patients had genomovar III and 43 (9.6%) had B. multivorans (genomovar II). Infection prevalence differed substantially by region (22 % of patients in Ontario vs. 5 % in Quebec). Results of typing by random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis or pulsed-field gel electrophoresis indicated that strains of B. cepacia complex from genomovar III are the most potentially transmissible and that the B. cepacia epidemic strain marker is a robust marker for transmissibility. urkholderia cepacia complex is an important group of pathogens in immunocompromised hosts, notably those with cystic fibrosis (CF) or chronic granulomatous disease (1,2). Lung infections with B. cepacia complex in certain patients with CF result in rapidly progressive, invasive, fatal

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances→French-language works237,207→