Knowledge and acceptability of the rectal treatment route in Laos and its application for pre-referral emergency malaria treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rectal artesunate has been shown to reduce death and disability from severe malaria caused by delays in reaching facilities capable of providing appropriate treatment. Acceptability of this mode of drug delivery in Laos is not known. In 2009 the acceptability of rectal treatments was evaluated among the general Lao population and Lao doctors in a national survey. METHODS: A cross sectional survey was performed of 985 households selected through a multi-stage random sampling process from 85 villages in 12/18 provinces and of 315 health staff randomly selected at each administrative level. RESULTS: Out of 985 families, 9% had used the rectal route to treat children (the main indication was seizures or constipation). The population considered it less effective than other routes. Other concerns raised included pain (28%), discomfort for children (40%) and the possibility of other side effects (20%). Of 300 health staff surveyed (nurses 44%, doctors 66%), only 51% had already used the rectal route with a suppository, mostly to treat fever (76%). Health staff working in provincial hospitals had more experience of using the rectal route than those in urban areas. The majority (92%) were keen to use the rectal route to treat malaria although oral and intramuscular routes were preferred and considered to be more efficacious. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Use of rectal treatments is uncommon in Laos and generally not considered to be very effective. This view is shared by the population and health care workers. More information and training are needed to convince the population and health staff of the efficacy and advantages of the rectal route for malaria treatment.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".