MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099520699

Community-Based Outbreaks in Vulnerable Populations of Invasive Infections Caused by Streptococcus

2011· article· en· W7099520699 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican and British Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutbreakEpidemiologySerotypeMultilocus sequence typingGenotypeStreptococcus pneumoniaePneumococcal disease
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Outbreaks of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) typically occur within institutions. Beginning in 2005, we detected an increase in serotype (ST) 5 and ST8 IPD cases, predominantly in homeless persons living in an open community. Methodology/Principal Findings: CASPER (Calgary Area S. pneumoniae Epidemiology Research) surveillance study of all IPD (sterile site isolates) in our region (pop,1,100,000). Interviews and chart reviews of all cases and all isolates phenotypically analyzed and selected isolated tested by multi-locus sequence typing (MLST). Conclusions/Significance: During 2005–2007, 162 cases of ST5 IPD and 45 cases of ST8 IPD were identified. The isolates demonstrated phenotypic and genotypic clonality. The ST5 isolates were sequence type (ST) 289 and demonstrated intermediate susceptibility to TMP-SMX. The ST8 isolates were predominantly ST1268, with a susceptible antimicrobial susceptibility profile. Individuals with ST5 IPD were more likely to be middle aged (OR 2.6), homeless (OR 4.4), using illicit drugs(OR 4.8), and asthmatic(OR 2.6). Those with ST8 were more likely to be male (OR 4.4), homeless (OR 2.6), aboriginal (OR7.3), and a current smoker (OR 2.5). Overlapping outbreaks of ST5 and ST8 IPD occurred in an open community in Calgary, Canada and homelessness was a predominant risk factor. Homelessness represents a unique community in which

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.186 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAmerican and British Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207