MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2778090858 · doi:10.4269/ajtmh.17-0728

Schistosoma haematobium Egg Excretion does not Increase after Exercise: Implications for Diagnostic Testing

2017· article· en· W2778090858 on OpenAlexaff
Jean T. Coulibaly, Jason R. Andrews, Nathan C. Lo, Eliézer K. N’Goran, Jürg Utzinger, Jennifer Keiser, Isaac I. Bogoch

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasites and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchistosoma haematobiumExcretionUrinationUrineUrine sampleSchistosomiasisTrematodaBiologyHelminthiasisPhysiologyMedicineAnimal scienceInternal medicineUrinary systemHelminthsImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children are frequently invited to exercise before micturition, as it is believed that this activity will result in higher Schistosoma haematobium egg excretion, and hence, increases sensitivity of microscopic diagnoses. However, the evidence of this recommendation is scant. In the study presented here, 257 children, aged 2–15 years from south Côte d’Ivoire, provided urine samples for microscopy on consecutive days; one sample without prior exercise and one sample after exercise. Comparing the same individuals without and with prior exercise, sample positivity for S. haematobium (25.7% versus 23.0%, P = 0.31) and mean egg counts (10.2 eggs/10 mL versus 8.5 eggs/10 mL, P = 0.45) did not differ. Exercise before urine collection does not appear to increase S. haematobium egg excretion.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and HygieneSame topicParasites and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207