An empirical malaria distribution map for West Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to produce a malaria distribution map that would constitute a useful tool for development and health planners in West Africa. The recently created continental database of malaria survey results (MARA/ARMA 1998) provides the opportunity for producing empirical models and maps of malaria distribution at a regional and eventually at a continental level. This paper reports on the mapping of malaria distribution for sub-Saharan West Africa based on these data. The strategy was to undertake a spatial statistical analysis of malaria parasite prevalence in relation to those potential bio-physical environmental factors involved in the distribution of malaria transmission intensity which are readily available at any map location. The resulting model was then used to predict parasite prevalence for the whole of West Africa. We also produced estimates of the proportion of population of each country in the region exposed to various categories of risk to show the impact that malaria is having on individual countries. The data represent a very large sample of children in West Africa. It constitutes a first attempt to produce a malaria risk map of the West African region, based entirely on malariometric data. We anticipate that it will provide useful additional guidance to control programme managers, and that it can be refined once sufficient additional data become available.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".