Heterogeneity of malaria prevalence in alluvial gold mining areas in Northern Mato Grosso State, Brazil
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyzes factors affecting the risk of malaria among individuals working in wildcat gold mining camps (garimpos) in northern Mato Grosso State in the Brazilian Amazon. Historically, such mining camps have the locations with the highest malaria prevalence in the Brazilian Amazon. However, little attention has focused on understanding the disease from the internal perspective of the mining camps themselves, such as the mining population's characteristics and its spatial organization. This paper adopts a stepwise logistic model to identify spatial, occupational-exposure, and cultural factors that affect malaria prevalence. According to the results, differences among individuals working and/or living in the gold mining areas could produce different exposure to the disease and thus to different risk of malaria prevalence. Understanding these differences may provide an important tool for identifying risk profiles in the gold mining and related population and for informing programs for prevention and treatment of malaria in the Amazon.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it