Cultural interpretations of the efficacy and side effects of antimalarials in Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the cultural interpretations and the perceived efficacy and side effects of antimalarials in Tanzania. Interviews with 56 mothers of children diagnosed with malaria revealed that they were nostalgic about chloroquine, a banned antimalarial. Additional findings indicated that a majority of the mothers had an overall negative disposition toward sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP), the first-line antimalarial. Mothers considered the persistence of fever as the primary undesirable side effect of SP, while also mentioning a range of other side effects. Mothers who could not afford an alternative to SP, rationalized the drug's side effects as indicative of disease egress. It is argued that ethnographic studies of cultural perceptions of malaria and antimalarials provide useful perspectives on how people negotiate the identity of a febrile illness, and how they understand and interpret the efficacy of existing antimalarials. In acknowledging the intra-cultural variability in perceptions of malaria and antimalarials, health policy makers must be cautious when implementing a 'one drug fits all' approach to malaria control.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".