Sleeping sickness in Uganda: revisiting current and historical distributions.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sleeping sickness is a parasitic, vector-borne disease, carried by the tsetse fly and prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa. The disease continues to pose a public health burden in Uganda, which experienced a widespread outbreak in 1900-1920, and a more recent outbreak in 1976-1989. The disease continues to spread to uninfected districts. OBJECTIVES: This paper compares the spatial distributions of sleeping in Uganda for the 1900-1920 outbreak period with current disease foci, and discusses information gaps and implications arising for future research, prevention and control. METHODS: Population census records for 1911 and sleeping sickness records from Medical and Sanitary Reports of the Ugandan Protectorate for 1905-1936 were extracted from the Uganda Archives. Current sleeping sickness distribution data were provided by the Ministry of Health, Uganda. These were used to develop sleeping sickness distribution maps for comparison between the early 1900s and the early 2000s. RESULTS: The distribution of sleeping sickness from 1905-1920 shows notable differences compared to the current distribution of disease. In particular, archival cases were recorded in south-west and central Uganda, areas currently free of disease. The disease focus has moved from lakeshore Buganda (1905-1920) to the Busoga and south-east districts. CONCLUSIONS: Archival sleeping sickness distributions indicate the potential for a much wider area of disease risk than indicated by current disease foci. This is compounded by an absence of tsetse distribution data, continued political instability in north-central Uganda, continued spread of disease into new districts, and evidence of the role of livestock movements in spreading the parasite. These results support concerns as to the potential mergence of the two disease foci in the south-east and north-west of the country.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".