MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2282196461 · doi:10.1093/pch/10.5.261

The impact of HIV/AIDS on children in developing countries

2005· article· en· W2282196461 on OpenAlexaff
Joanne Embreé

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingDeveloping countryMedicineTransmission (telecommunications)Public healthDeveloped countryHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)PopulationEnvironmental healthHealth careFamily medicinePediatricsEconomic growthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HIV infection and AIDS among children continues to be a significant problem in developing countries despite the progress that has been made in HIV prevention and AIDS treatment elsewhere during the past two decades. The reasons for this difference are complex and multifactorial. They include the higher background prevalence of infection among adults in some communities in developing countries, the slow implementation in many countries of prenatal HIV screening programs and prophylaxis which can reduce the transmission to infants during labor and delivery, the social and health consequences of not breastfeeding, and the economic realities associated with expensive diagnostic testing and antiretroviral treatment. While the world waits for an effective HIV/AIDS vaccine, to reduce the prevalence of HIV in the community, public health programs need to continue to emphasize proven methods of HIV transmission prevention among groups with a high-risk of HIV acquisition, as well as provide counselling for the general population about personal protection and the provision of compassionate care for those affected.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207