MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992076041 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2015.11.04

Evaluation of Prevalence Patterns of Dengue Fever in Lahore District through Geo-Spatial Techniques

2015· article· en· W1992076041 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Syed Ali Asad Naqvi, Syed Jamil Hasan Kazmi, Saima Shaikh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDengue feverGeographyIncidence (geometry)Cluster (spacecraft)PopulationVeterinary medicineEnvironmental healthSocioeconomicsMedicineDemographyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dengue and its impacts are growing environmental, economic and health concerns in Lahore. Disease pattern is important to know for better control and effective management, GIS is one of the tested tools and quite efficient for this purpose. In this study, firstly month-wise dengue cases mapping for seven consecutive years (2007-2013) is performed in order to reveal temporal or seasonal pattern of dengue disease in Lahore district. Then a composite analysis was conducted using Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW) technique in order to show dengue most affected locations (towns) and in this analysis, all cases of the study period (2007-2013) were appended and visualized by IDW. Temporally, September (6548 cases) was the most dengue affected month of all years whereas February (4 cases) was marked as least affected throughout the dengue incidence period. Endemic Foci is noticed in 2011 most affected months. This cluster of disease is agglomerated near Ravi River and Densely Populated Towns, which further aggravated the incidence of dengue in economically deprived areas. Data Gunj Baksh town was the most affected town and IDW results showed that this town is composite endemic foci where cases were agglomerated most frequently. The reason of prevalence in this town would possibly be due to its more density of population and proximity of Ravi River.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.286 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207