↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of multinomial logistic regression models for predicting causative pathogens of food poisoning cases

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Veterinary Medical Science, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of multinomial logistic regression models for predicting causative pathogens of food poisoning cases
Published in
Journal of Veterinary Medical Science, June 2018
DOI 10.1292/jvms.17-0653
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hideya INOUE, Tomoyuki SUZUKI, Masashi HYODO, Masami MIYAKE

Abstract

In cases of food poisoning, it is important for food sanitation inspectors to determine the causative pathogen as early as possible and take necessary measures to minimize outbreaks. Interviews are usually conducted to obtain epidemiological information to aid in the rapid determination of the cause. However, the current method of determining the causative pathogen has the disadvantage of being reliant upon the experience and knowledge of food sanitation inspectors. Here, we analyzed 529 infectious food poisoning incidents reported in five municipalities in the Kinki region to develop a tool for evaluation using a multinomial logistic regression model, which can predict the causative pathogen based on the patients' epidemiological information. This tool predicts the most probable cause of the incident by generating a list of pathogens with the highest probability. As a result of leave-one-out cross validation, the agreement ratio with the actual pathogen was 86.4%, and this ratio increased to 97.5% when the agreement was judged by including the true pathogen within the top three pathogens with the highest probability. In cases where the difference of probability between the first and second candidate pathogen was ≥50%, the agreement ratio increased to 94.2%. Using this tool, it is possible to accurately estimate the causative pathogen at an early stage based on patient information, and this will further help narrow the target of investigations to identify causative agent, thereby leading to a prompt identification, which can prevent the spread of food poisoning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 33%
Student > Bachelor 3 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Professor 1 8%
Researcher 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 2 17%
Engineering 2 17%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Mathematics 1 8%
Other 2 17%
Unknown 3 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 September 2018.
All research outputs
#16,053,755
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Veterinary Medical Science
#1,084
of 3,547 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,258
of 341,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Veterinary Medical Science
#15
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,547 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.