Using malarial retinopathy to improve the classification of children with cerebral malaria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanisms leading to death in cerebral malaria (CM) remain unclear. We compared clinical and laboratory data among children with CM, categorized by ocular fundus findings, to elucidate differences that suggest different underlying pathological processes. From 1999-2005, standard examinations, treatment and record keeping were used for children with a clinical diagnosis of CM. Children were divided into ocular subgroups: normal fundus (N), malarial retinopathy (R), or papilloedema alone (P) and appropriate statistical tests were used to compare clinical and laboratory findings among groups. Eight hundred and eighty children who had eye examinations within 6 h of admission were included in the analysis. The groups differed significantly in case-fatality rates: Group P, 44.4% (95% CI 25.3-63.2), Group R, 18.0% (95% CI 15.6-22.3) and Group N, 7.0% (95% CI 4.2-9.8). There were also significant differences among the groups in blood pressure, prevalence of deep breathing, haematocrit, parasite density, platelet concentration and, among survivors, hours taken to recover from coma. Differences among groups suggest that different underlying pathophysiological processes are operating in children with CM defined by existing criteria. Our proposed classification, by improving the specificity of diagnosis, would enhance consistency among different study sites and prove useful in future research studies.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".