Evolution of parasitic diseases in a collectivity of HIV positive children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Intestinal parasitism represents an important problem of children health. Infestations with protozoa and helmints even have an increased incidence in children they weren’t observed because they were asymptomatic and atypical but with negative influence on their health regardless their immune status. Objective: To evaluate parasitic infections in a collectivity of 38 children HIV+ from Cernavoda city (Hospis “St. Laurence”) over a period of 10 years (2002 - 2012). Material and method: We performed two coproparasitologic examinations (in year 2002 - before antiretroviral treatment and in year 2012 - after 10 years of antiretroviral treatment) by concentration and staining methods and ELISA for Cryptosporidium parvum antigen. Results: In our group of study the median age was 11.65 yrs. in 2002 and 20.6 yrs. in 2012. Sex ratio was M: F = 1:1.2. In year 2002 we found an incidence of parasitic disease of 94.9%, and in year 2012 we found an incidence of 26.31%. In year 2002 we found 6 cases of Giardia intestinalis, 5 cases of Blastocystis hominis, 15 cases of Chilomastix mesnili, 2 cases of Entamoeba coli, 1 case of Ascaris lumbricoides, 2 cases of Hymenolepis nana and 5 cases of poliparasitic disease. In year 2012 we found 4 cases of Giardia intestinalis, 2 cases of Entamoeba coli, 2 cases of Blastocystis hominis and one case of Isospora belli and another one case of Ascaris lumbricoides. Conclusions: After ten years of HAART the incidence of parasitic diseases registered an important decrease from 94.9% to 26.31%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".