MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1911519540 · doi:10.4081/gh.2015.326

Application of geo-spatial technology in schistosomiasis modelling in Africa: a review

2015· review· en· W1911519540 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tawanda Manyangadze, Moses John Chimbari, Michael Gebreslasie, Samson Mukaratirwa

Bibliographic record

VenueGeospatial health · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasites and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInyuvesi Yakwazulu-NataliInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsGeographic information systemSpatial analysisRemote sensingMultidisciplinary approachGeographySchistosomiasisComputer scienceGlobal Positioning SystemCartographyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schistosomiasis continues to impact socio-economic development negatively in sub-Saharan Africa. The advent of spatial technologies, including geographic information systems (GIS), Earth observation (EO) and global positioning systems (GPS) assist modelling efforts. However, there is increasing concern regarding the accuracy and precision of the current spatial models. This paper reviews the literature regarding the progress and challenges in the development and utilization of spatial technology with special reference to predictive models for schistosomiasis in Africa. Peer-reviewed papers identified through a PubMed search using the following keywords: geo-spatial analysis OR remote sensing OR modelling OR earth observation OR geographic information systems OR prediction OR mapping AND schistosomiasis AND Africa were used. Statistical uncertainty, low spatial and temporal resolution satellite data and poor validation were identified as some of the factors that compromise the precision and accuracy of the existing predictive models. The need for high spatial resolution of remote sensing data in conjunction with ancillary data viz. ground-measured climatic and environmental information, local presence/absence intermediate host snail surveys as well as prevalence and intensity of human infection for model calibration and validation are discussed. The importance of a multidisciplinary approach in developing robust, spatial data capturing, modelling techniques and products applicable in epidemiology is highlighted.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeospatial healthSame topicParasites and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207