MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335283786 · doi:10.1093/tropej/fmu071

Extent of Microcytic Anemia among Children in a low-income, Peri-urban Community in the Dominican Republic using different cut-points

2014· article· en· W2335283786 on OpenAlexaff
John D. McLennan, Michael A. Steele

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Tropical Pediatrics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIron Metabolism and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrocytosisMedicineAnemiaMean corpuscular volumeHemoglobinLow incomeMicrocytic anemiaPediatricsDemographyIron deficiencyInternal medicineSocioeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Response to anemia in low-resource settings may entail presumptive iron treatment for those with Hemoglobin (Hb) levels falling below certain cut points. This study aimed to inform an anemia screening and treatment service in a low-income community in the Dominican Republic by determining (i) the prevalence of anemia in young children attending this service using different Hb cut points and (ii) the extent of microcytosis using different recommended cut points for the mean corpuscular volume (MCV). Using the WHO recommended cut point of <11.0 g/dl, 69.9% of 292 children would be classified as anemic, while using a more conservative cut point, <10.0 g/dl, 34.6% would be identified. Depending on the Hb cut point and which of two age-based MCV cut points are used, the prevalence of microcytosis within the anemic subsamples ranged from 23.5% to 80.2%. With increasing availability of complete blood counts in low resource settings (vs. Hb only), more sophisticated management algorithms are necessary to guide primary care efforts.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Tropical PediatricsSame topicIron Metabolism and DisordersFrench-language works237,207