Malaria incidence trends and their association with climatic variables in rural Gwanda, Zimbabwe, 2005–2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Malaria is a public health problem in Zimbabwe. Although many studies have indicated that climate change may influence the distribution of malaria, there is paucity of information on its trends and association with climatic variables in Zimbabwe. To address this shortfall, the trends of malaria incidence and its interaction with climatic variables in rural Gwanda, Zimbabwe for the period January 2005 to April 2015 was assessed. METHODS: Retrospective data analysis of reported cases of malaria in three selected Gwanda district rural wards (Buvuma, Ntalale and Selonga) was carried out. Data on malaria cases was collected from the district health information system and ward clinics while data on precipitation and temperature were obtained from the climate hazards group infrared precipitation with station data (CHIRPS) database and the moderate resolution imaging spectro-radiometer (MODIS) satellite data, respectively. Distributed lag non-linear models (DLNLM) were used to determine the temporal lagged association between monthly malaria incidence and monthly climatic variables. RESULTS: There were 246 confirmed malaria cases in the three wards with a mean incidence of 0.16/1000 population/month. The majority of malaria cases (95%) occurred in the > 5 years age category. The results showed no correlation between trends of clinical malaria (unconfirmed) and confirmed malaria cases in all the three study wards. There was a significant association between malaria incidence and the climatic variables in Buvuma and Selonga wards at specific lag periods. In Ntalale ward, only precipitation (1- and 3-month lag) and mean temperature (1- and 2-month lag) were significantly associated with incidence at specific lag periods (p < 0.05). DLNM results suggest a key risk period in current month, based on key climatic conditions in the 1-4 month period prior. CONCLUSIONS: As the period of high malaria risk is associated with precipitation and temperature at 1-4 month prior in a seasonal cycle, intensifying malaria control activities over this period will likely contribute to lowering the seasonal malaria incidence.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".