MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170731026 · doi:10.4269/ajtmh.12-0640

Cross-Sectional Study to Assess Risk Factors for Leishmaniasis in an Endemic Region in Sri Lanka

2013· article· en· W2170731026 on OpenAlexaff
Shalindra Ranasinghe, Rajitha Wickremasinghe, Asoka Munasinghe, Sanjeeva Hulangamuwa, Sundaramoorthy Sivanantharajah, Kamal Seneviratne, Samantha Bandara, Indira Athauda, Chaturi Navaratne, O.P. De Silva, Hasini Wackwella, Greg Matlashewski, Renu Wickremasinghe

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSri lankaCross-sectional studyEnvironmental healthLeishmaniasisEndemic diseasesGeographySocioeconomicsMedicineTanzaniaImmunologyPathologyEnvironmental planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sri Lanka reports significantly more cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) cases than visceral leishmaniasis (VL) cases, both of which are caused by Leishmania donovani MON-37. A cross-sectional study conducted in an area with a high prevalence of CL prevalent included 954 participants of an estimated population of 61,674 to estimate the number of CL cases, ascertain whether there is a pool of asymptomatic VL cases, and identify risk factors for transmission. A total of 31 cases of CL were identified, of whom 21 were previously diagnosed and 10 were new cases. Using rK39 rapid diagnostic test to detect antibodies against Leishmania spp., we found that only one person was seropositive but did not have clinical symptoms of CL or VL, which indicated low transmission of VL in this area. χ(2) test, independent sample t-test, and multivariate analysis of sociodemographic and spatial distribution of environmental risk factors showed that living near paddy fields is associated with increased risk for transmission of CL (P ≤ 0.01).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations30
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and HygieneSame topicResearch on Leishmaniasis StudiesFrench-language works237,207