MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2781803574 · doi:10.5588/pha.17.0070

Occupational tuberculosis in South Africa: are health care workers adequately protected?

2017· article· en· W2781803574 on OpenAlexaff
Molebogeng Malotle, Jerry Spiegel, Annalee Yassi, D. Ngubeni, Lyndsay M. O’Hara, Prince Adu, Elizabeth Bryce, Nosimilo Mlangeni, G. S. M. Gemell, Muzimkhulu Zungu

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Action · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare cost, quality, practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTuberculosisHealth careInfection controlEnvironmental healthFamily medicineSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Setting: A provincial tertiary hospital in Gauteng province, South Africa, with a high burden of tuberculosis (TB) patients and high risk of TB exposure among health care workers (HCWs). Objective: To determine HCWs' adherence to recommended TB infection prevention and control practices, TB training and access to health services and HCW TB rates. Design: Interviews with 285 HCWs using a structured questionnaire as part of a large, international mixed-methods study. Results: Despite 10 HCWs (including seven support HCWs) acquiring clinical TB during their period of employment, 62.8% of interviewees were unaware of the hospital's TB management protocol. Receipt of training was low (34.5% of all HCWs and <5% of support HCWs trained on TB transmission; 27.5% of nurses trained on respirator use), as was use of respiratory protection (44.5% of HCWs trained on managing TB patients). Support HCWs were over 36 times more likely to use respiratory protection if trained; nurses who were trained were approximately 40 times more likely to use respirators if they were readily available. Conclusion: Improved coordination and uptake of TB infection prevention training is urgently needed, especially for non-clinical HCWs in settings of regular exposure to TB patients. Adequate supplies of appropriate respiratory protection must be made available.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.739
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.174 · 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.

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

Citations33
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Health ActionSame topicHealthcare cost, quality, practicesFrench-language works237,207