Current Drugs for Antimalarial Chemoprophylaxis: A Review of Efficacy and Safety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The resurgence of malaria in areas where it had been controlled previously and the concurrent emergence of drug-resistant malaria strains contribute to the current recommendations concerning malaria chemoprophylaxis. Chloroquine (e.g., Aralen), the former standard for malaria prevention and treatment,is now effective only in limited areas, and multidrug resistance has made chemoprophylaxis with mefloquine (e.g., Lariam) less effective in some regions. This has complicated the decision-making process with regard to selection of optimal antimalarial drug regimens for international travelers. Guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provide recommendations for the use of three currently available drugs for malaria prophylaxis in chloroquine-resistant areas: mefloquine, doxycycline (e.g., Vibramycin, Doryx), and atovaquone/proguanil (e.g., Malarone). Guidelines from the World Health Organization (WHO) include the three drugs above, and in addition, consider proguanil (e.g., Paludrine) coadministered or in fixed-dose combination with chloroquine, and also primaquine among current choices for malaria prophylaxis. This article presents a concise review of current knowledge about use of these drug regimens for prophylaxis against malaria. Given the increase in international travel and the spread of malaria into previously disease-free areas,growing numbers of travelers now face the risk of contracting this disease. 1 The number of cases of imported malaria has been rising in the United States,Canada,and other developed countries since the 1970s. In 1997, over 1,500 cases of imported malaria, including 6 fatalities, were reported in the United States, whereas in Canada, 1,036 cases of imported malaria were reported that year. 2‐5 Compounding the problem of increased incidence of malaria,parasite resis
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".