MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002202509 · doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0001549

A Research Agenda for Helminth Diseases of Humans: Intervention for Control and Elimination

2012· review· en· W2002202509 on OpenAlexafffund
Roger K. Prichard, Marı́a-Gloria Basáñez, Boakye A. Boatin, James McCarthy, Héctor H. Garcı́a, Guo-Jing Yang, Banchob Sripa, Sara Lustigman

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasites and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesWorld Health OrganizationEuropean CommissionLeverhulme TrustQueensland HealthRoyal SocietyWellcomeWellcome TrustUNICEFOffice of the Higher Education CommissionWorld Bank Group
KeywordsLymphatic filariasisMass drug administrationNeglected tropical diseasesOnchocerciasisLoa loaTropical diseaseSchistosomiasisHelminthiasisEnvironmental healthMedicineHelminth infectionsAnthelminticDrug resistanceImmunologyHelminthsFilariasisPublic healthBiologyVeterinary medicineDiseasePopulationPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recognising the burden helminth infections impose on human populations, and particularly the poor, major intervention programmes have been launched to control onchocerciasis, lymphatic filariasis, soil-transmitted helminthiases, schistosomiasis, and cysticercosis. The Disease Reference Group on Helminth Infections (DRG4), established in 2009 by the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR), was given the mandate to review helminthiases research and identify research priorities and gaps. A summary of current helminth control initiatives is presented and available tools are described. Most of these programmes are highly dependent on mass drug administration (MDA) of anthelmintic drugs (donated or available at low cost) and require annual or biannual treatment of large numbers of at-risk populations, over prolonged periods of time. The continuation of prolonged MDA with a limited number of anthelmintics greatly increases the probability that drug resistance will develop, which would raise serious problems for continuation of control and the achievement of elimination. Most initiatives have focussed on a single type of helminth infection, but recognition of co-endemicity and polyparasitism is leading to more integration of control. An understanding of the implications of control integration for implementation, treatment coverage, combination of pharmaceuticals, and monitoring is needed. To achieve the goals of morbidity reduction or elimination of infection, novel tools need to be developed, including more efficacious drugs, vaccines, and/or antivectorial agents, new diagnostics for infection and assessment of drug efficacy, and markers for possible anthelmintic resistance. In addition, there is a need for the development of new formulations of some existing anthelmintics (e.g., paediatric formulations). To achieve ultimate elimination of helminth parasites, treatments for the above mentioned helminthiases, and for taeniasis and food-borne trematodiases, will need to be integrated with monitoring, education, sanitation, access to health services, and where appropriate, vector control or reduction of the parasite reservoir in alternative hosts. Based on an analysis of current knowledge gaps and identification of priorities, a research and development agenda for intervention tools considered necessary for control and elimination of human helminthiases is presented, and the challenges to be confronted are discussed.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0120.024
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0230.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.008

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations198
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS neglected tropical diseasesSame topicParasites and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207