MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162194492 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v2n2p41

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Intervention for Malaria Control in Rural Areas in China

2010· article· en· W2162194492 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gorgui Diouf, Yihua Xu, Patrick N. Kpanyen, Cai Li, Xiumin Gan, Shaofa Nie

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalariaEnvironmental healthResidenceSocioeconomic statusLogistic regressionPublic healthIntervention (counseling)Rural areaMedicinePopulationChinaDemographyGeographyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malaria can be prevented at the individual level by taking personal protections. However, effective preventiveaction is a result of public health programs that adequately teach preventive measures to the population. Thisstudy was carried out in 2007 to evaluate the knowledge on malaria control and prevention and to evaluate theeffects of intervention for malaria control in rural community in China. An interventional study followed approximately 1971 randomly selected respondents over a period of fourmonths. According to the level of endemicity of the areas, this particular study was carried out in a ruralcommunity. Two surveys were performed for the study in point. Demographic and socioeconomic variableswere used as predictor variables in logistic regression analysis.Different patterns of malaria behavior were found in the closely situated households and at the school level.Gender, age, length of residence time in the areas, and health seeking behaviors was found to be statisticallysignificant predictors of health behaviors (P

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.371
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations8
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207