MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2557507247 · doi:10.4269/ajtmh.16-0559

Examination of Antibody Responses as a Measure of Exposure to Malaria in the Indigenous Batwa and Their Non-Indigenous Neighbors in Southwestern Uganda

2016· article· en· W2557507247 on OpenAlexaff
Manisha A. Kulkarni, Gala Garrod, Lea Berrang‐Ford, Isaac Ssewanyana, Sherilee L. Harper, Nestor Baraheberwa, Blánaid Donnelly, Kaitlin Patterson, Didacus B. Namanya, Shuaib Lwasa, Chris Drakeley

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMalaria Research and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMcGill UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsIndigenousMalariaAntibodyMeasure (data warehouse)GeographyImmunologyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding variations in malaria transmission and exposure is critical to identify populations at risk and enable better targeting of interventions. The indigenous Batwa of southwestern Uganda have a disproportionate burden of malaria infection compared with their non-indigenous neighbors. To better understand the individual- and community-level determinants of malaria exposure, a seroepidemiological study was conducted in 10 local council cells in Kanungu District, Uganda, in April 2014. The Batwa had twice the odds of being seropositive to two Plasmodium falciparum –specific antigens, apical membrane antigen-1 and merozoite surface protein-1 19 , compared with the non-indigenous Bakiga (odds ratio = 2.08, 95% confidence interval = 1.51–2.88). This trend was found irrespective of altitude level and after controlling for cell location. Seroconversion rates in the Batwa were more than twice those observed in the Bakiga. For the Batwa, multiple factors may be associated with higher exposure to malaria and antibody levels relative to their non-indigenous neighbors.

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)0.001
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 score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and HygieneSame topicMalaria Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207