MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794654881 · doi:10.2196/10638

Descriptive Analysis of Suspected Crimean-Congo Haemorrhagic Fever (CCHF) Cases in Isolation Ward of Public Sector Hospital, Quetta from March-August 2017

2018· article· en· W2794654881 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Farida Khudaidad, Asma Saeed

Bibliographic record

VenueIproceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Vectors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsolation (microbiology)TickMedicineTransmission (telecommunications)Crimean–Congo hemorrhagic feverPublic healthGeographyEnvironmental healthVirologyBiologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: CCHF cases from Balochistan and Afghanistan are referred to isolation ward in Quetta. CCHF is endemic to Balochistan but still there is no established surveillance system in province and no tick bite reporting system. The main objective was to determine the means of transmission and the epidemiologic characteristics of disease. Objective: Describe the Epidemiology of CCHF and analyze the situation of health facility. Methods: A descriptive study was carried out in the CCHF isolation ward in Quetta from March-August 2017. Using standardized case definition, all patients admitted in Isolation ward with clinical evidence of CCHF were included in the study. After taking informed consent, data was collected on demographic factors, history of animal contact, tick bite history, co morbidity, laboratory results and treatment outcome. Means and percentages were calculated. Results: During the study period, 51 suspected CCHF patients were admitted in Isolation ward, 38 (74.5%) males were affected. Mean age of the cases was 30 years (range 02-75years). Most affected 16 (31%) age group was 21-30 years. Forty-eight (94%) cases had history of animal contact and 44 (86%) with tick bite. Majority of cases 42 (82%) were reported from May -August. 30 patients in study were tested by PCR, 16 (53.3%) were positive, out of which 5 (31%) expired. It is only isolation ward in whole province with 2 doctors, 2 nurses & 1 paramedic. Proper Personal protective equipment was not available. No Laboratory was available for immediate investigations. Conclusions: Given the overall results important risk factors for CCHF are history of tick bite, high-risk occupations and having contact with livestock. Public health measures should focus on preventing tick bites, increasing awareness of CCHF signs and symptoms, adopting hospital infection control practices, timely investigation & treatment to reduce mortality. Government should set up isolation units in all Major hospitals with proper surveillance system in Province.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIproceedingsSame topicViral Infections and VectorsFrench-language works237,207