MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W135892236

Prevalence and Associated Factors to Human Papillomaviruses Types 16 and 18 among Malagasy Women in Fianarantsoa, Madagascar

2013· article· en· W135892236 on OpenAlexaff
J C R Rakotozafy, A Ratiarson

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Medicine and Diagnostics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolymerase chain reactionPrimer (cosmetics)VirologyMedicineTypingGynecologyInternal medicineOncologyBiologyGeneGeneticsChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we analyzed by means of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) cerv ical specimens obtained from consenting women in Fianarantsoa, 1712 cerv ical specimens obtained fro m them. The data obtained were co mp iled to establish correlation and prevalence of HPV. Different PCR techniques were used to detect HPV in fection. Consensus primer sets MY and GP, and specific primers for HPV 16 and 18 were utilized to obtain the HPV typing. The result showed that 43 specimensare positive by M Y and GP that 22(51.16%) are HPV 16 and 15(34.88%) HPV18. 67.56% of the infected are about 45 year old; 48.65% d ivorced; each woman had at least 2 d ifferent partners before marry ing and mo re of 4 partners after divorce. 29.73% of them are married and everyone had at least 4 partners before marrying. 21.62% are un married, with mu ltip le partners. Our results indicated that HPV infections, especially those HPV 16 and 18 represent a significant public health in Madagascar. Keyswords Consensus Primers, Fianarantsoa, Human Pap illo mavirus (HPV), Madagascar, Poly merase Chain Reaction (PCR)

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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Medicine and Diagnostics→Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV Research→French-language works237,207→