Malaria prophylaxis with atovaquone-proguanil caused fewer gastrointestinal adverse events than chloroquine-proguanil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(2000) Lancet 356, 1888. Høgh B, Clarke PD, Camus D, et al, and the Malarone International Study Team. . Atovaquone-proguanil versus chloroquine-proguanil for malaria prophylaxis in non-immune travellers: a randomised, double-blind study. . Dec 2; . : . –94 . [OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] QUESTION: In travellers who are not immune to malaria, is malaria prophylaxis with atovaquone proguanil equivalent to that with chloroquine proguanil for adverse events (AEs)? Randomised (allocation concealed*), blinded (clinicians and patients),* placebo controlled trial with follow up at 7, 28, and 60 days after leaving a malaria endemic area. 21 travel clinics in Denmark, the UK, France, Germany, the Netherlands, South Africa, and Canada. 1083 participants (mean age 36 y, 52% men, 96% white) who weighed >50 kg, were age ≥14 years, were in good health, and planned to travel ≤28 days in Africa (63%) or other Plasmodium falciparum endemic areas. Exclusion criteria included a history of seizures; psychiatric or neurological disorders; cardiac, … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DLancet%26rft.stitle%253DLancet%26rft.aulast%253DH%25C3%25B8gh%26rft.auinit1%253DB.%26rft.volume%253D356%26rft.issue%253D9245%26rft.spage%253D1888%26rft.epage%253D1894%26rft.atitle%253DAtovaquone-proguanil%2Bversus%2Bchloroquine-proguanil%2Bfor%2Bmalaria%2Bprophylaxis%2Bin%2Bnon-immune%2Btravellers%253A%2Ba%2Brandomised%252C%2Bdouble-blind%2Bstudy.%2BMalarone%2BInternational%2BStudy%2BTeam.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1016%252FS0140-6736%252800%252903260-8%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F11130385%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0140-6736(00)03260-8&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=11130385&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F6%2F4%2F118.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000165665400012&link_type=ISI
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".