MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113607278 · doi:10.7554/elife.03925

Vitamin A supplements, routine immunization, and the subsequent risk of Plasmodium infection among children under 5 years in sub-Saharan Africa

2015· article· en· W2113607278 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Maria-Graciela Hollm-Delgado, Frédéric B. Piel, Daniel J. Weiss, Rosalind E. Howes, Elizabeth A. Stuart, Simon I Hay, Robert E. Black

Bibliographic record

VenueeLife · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMalaria Research and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWellcome TrustWellcomeFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsParasitemiaMalariaMedicineMeaslesVaccinationRelative riskImmunizationPlasmodium falciparumImmunologyTropical medicinePediatricsVitaminConfidence intervalEnvironmental healthInternal medicineAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies, partly based on murine models, suggest childhood immunization and vitamin A supplements may confer protection against malaria infection, although strong evidence to support these theories in humans has so far been lacking. We analyzed national survey data from children aged 6-59 months in four sub-Saharan African countries over an 18-month time period, to determine the risk of Plasmodium spp. parasitemia (n=8390) and Plasmodium falciparum HRP-2 (PfHRP-2)-related antigenemia (n=6121) following vitamin A supplementation and standard vaccination. Bacille Calmette Guerin-vaccinated children were more likely to be PfHRP-2 positive (relative risk [RR]=4.06, 95% confidence interval [CI]=2.00-8.28). No association was identified with parasitemia. Measles and polio vaccination were not associated with malaria. Children receiving vitamin A were less likely to present with parasitemia (RR=0.46, 95% CI=0.39-0.54) and antigenemia (RR=0.23, 95% CI=0.17-0.29). Future studies focusing on climate seasonality, placental malaria and HIV are needed to characterize better the association between vitamin A and malaria infection in different 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeLifeSame topicMalaria Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207