Assessment of factors related to individuals who were never treated during mass drug administration for lymphatic filariasis in Ambon City, Indonesia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: One challenge to achieving Lymphatic filariasis (LF) elimination is the persistent coverage-compliance gap during annual mass drug administration (MDA) and the risk of ongoing transmission among never treated individuals. Our analysis examined factors associated with individuals who were never treated during MDA. METHODS: Data were derived from two cross-sectional surveys conducted in Waihaong and Air Salobar Health Center in 2018 and 2019. We analyzed information from 1915 respondents aged 18 years or above. The study outcome was individuals who self-reported never treatment during any round of MDA. All potential predictors were grouped into socio-demographic, health system, therapy and individual factors. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine factors associated with never treatment in any year of MDA. RESULTS: Nearly half (42%) of respondents self-reported they were never treated during any round of MDA. Factors associated with increased odds of never treatment were respondents working in formal sectors (aOR = 1.75, p = 0.040), living in the catchment area of Waihaong Health Center (aOR = 2.33, p = 0.029), and those perceiving the possibility of adverse events after swallowing LF drugs (aOR = 2.86, p<0.001). Respondents reporting difficulty swallowing all the drugs (aOR = 3.12, p<0.001) and having difficulties remembering the time to swallow the drugs (aOR = 1.53, p = 0.049) also had an increased odds of never treatment. The highest odds of never treatment were associated with respondents reporting almost none of their family members took LF drugs (aOR = 3.93, p<0.001). Respondents confident that they knew how to swallow LF drugs had a reduced odds (aOR = 0.26, p<0.001) of never treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to reassure community members about adverse events, specific instructions on how to take LF drugs, and improving awareness that MDA participation is part of one's contribution to promoting community health are essential drivers for uptake with LF drugs during MDA.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».