MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032441692 · doi:10.1586/eri.12.123

Malaria in pregnancy: diagnosing infection and identifying fetal risk

2012· review· en· W2032441692 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrea L. Conroy, Chloë R. McDonald, Kevin C. Kain

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Anti-infective Therapy · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMalaria Research and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMalariaPregnancyMedicinePublic healthDiseaseModalitiesEnvironmental healthIntensive care medicineIdentification (biology)ObstetricsImmunologyBiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite increased malaria control efforts, recent reports indicate that over 1.2 million deaths due to malaria occurred in 2010. Pregnant women represent a particularly vulnerable risk group as malaria infection can lead to life-threatening disease for the mother and fetus. With 125 million women at risk of malaria in pregnancy every year, better diagnostic tools are needed for timely identification and treatment of malaria infection. Diagnostic surveillance tools are also needed to estimate disease burden and inform public health policies. In this review, the authors focus on malaria diagnostics in pregnancy and discuss considerations for different Plasmodium species and geographic regions. The authors also look at promising diagnostic modalities to monitor fetal and maternal health in pregnancy and discuss implementation barriers for low resource settings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations27
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Anti-infective TherapySame topicMalaria Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207