Tuberculosis in Rwanda: challenges to reaching the targets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rwanda has a generalized HIV epidemic: 3.1% of adults are living with HIV/AIDS.1 Care, treatment and prevention services for the approximately 183 558 adults and 13 901 children living with HIV/AIDS have been rapidly scaled up over the past three years under the guidance of the Rwandan Ministry of Health’s Treatment Research for AIDS Center. By November 2006, almost 33 000 HIV-infected adults and children were receiving antiretroviral therapy.2 Expansion and enhancement of DOTS in the six-point Stop TB Strategy described by Laserson & Wells have been implemented in Rwanda by the health ministry’s national integrated programme to combat leprosy and TB since 1990. Through recent programme improvements, treatment success rates have increased from 58% in 2003 to 81% by the third quarter of 2006; however, case detection was an estimated 24% in 2005.3–5 Thus, Rwanda is close to achieving the WHO target for treatment success, but is below the target for case detection. Concerted efforts are being made to ensure that effective smear microscopy and directly-observed therapy are available nationwide. Further efforts are needed to reach the goals, especially for case detection. A recent national survey showing that the prevalence of multidrug resistance among new TB patients is 3.9% gives cause for concern.6
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".