MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288446565 · doi:10.4269/ajtmh.15-0408

Social and Economic Burden of Human Leishmaniasis

2016· review· en· W2288446565 on OpenAlexaff
Ifeoma Okwor, Jude E. Uzonna

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeishmaniasisSocioeconomic statusDiseaseTourismDeveloping countryPublic healthBusinessEconomic growthRural areaEnvironmental healthSocioeconomicsMedicineGeographyPopulationImmunologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leishmaniasis continues to pose a major public health problem worldwide. With new epidemics occurring in endemic areas and the spread of the disease to previously free areas because of migration, tourism, and military activities, there is a great need for the development of an effective vaccine. Leishmaniasis is a disease of the poor, occurring mostly in remote rural villages with poor housing and little or no access to modern health-care facilities. In endemic areas, diagnosis of any form of leishmaniasis puts a huge financial strain on an already meagre financial resource at both the individual and community levels. Most often families need to sell their assets (land and livestock) or take loans from informal financial outfits with heavy interest rates to pay for the diagnosis and treatment of leishmaniasis. Here, we discuss the disease with special emphasis on its socioeconomic impact on the affected individual and community. In addition, we highlight the reasons why continued research aimed at developing an effective Leishmania vaccine is necessary.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations332
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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