Endemic prevalence of hepatitis B and C in Mongolia: A nationwide survey amongst Mongolian adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, a representative group of Mongolian adults was tested for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV). Screening was conducted at 17 different locations on a randomly sampled group, representing the Mongolian adult population. A total of 1158 adults, 500 (43.1%) men and 659 (56.9%) women were included. The prevalence estimates of HBV and HCV amongst the general Mongolian adult population were found to be 11.1%±1% (SE) and 8.5%±0.7% or 207 418 and 160 228 cases, respectively. For HCV, the majority of cases are concentrated in older age groups with a prevalence of 25.8% amongst those aged 50 years and above, whilst the prevalence of HBV does not vary significantly amongst age groups. For both, HBV and HCV, the data indicate a higher risk of infection and a higher mortality because of the hepatitis amongst men than amongst women. This study represents the first nationwide estimate of the prevalence of HBV in Mongolia and also considered the first for HCV since 2005 and confirm the position of Mongolia as one of the hot-spots of chronic hepatitis infection in the world with about 19.4% of the adult population being infected with either HBV or HCV.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".