MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097748226 · doi:10.1017/s0021932014000479

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AND CHILDHOOD FEVER IN AREAS OF THE OUAGADOUGOU HEALTH AND DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM, BURKINA FASO

2014· article· en· W2097748226 on OpenAlexaff
Franklin Bouba Djourdebbé, Stéphanie Dos Santos, Thomas Legrand, Abdramane Soura

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biosocial Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusEnvironmental healthLogistic regressionNeighbourhood (mathematics)GeographyPopulationPublic healthSocioeconomicsMedicineDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using data on 825 under-5 children from the Ouagadougou Health and Demographic Surveillance System collected in 2010, this article examines the effects of aspects of the immediate environment on childhood fever. Logit regression models were estimated to assess the effects of the quality of the local environment on the probability that a child is reported to have had a fever in the two weeks preceding the survey, after controlling for various demographic and socioeconomic variables. While the estimated impact of some environmental factors persisted in the full models, the effects of variables such as access to water and type of household waste management decreased in the presence of demographic, socioeconomic and neighbourhood factors. The management of waste water was found to significantly affect the occurrence of childhood fever. Overall, the results of the study call for more efforts to promote access to tap water to households at prices that are affordable for the local population, where the threats to child health appears to be greatest.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biosocial ScienceSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207