Summary of recommendations on malaria issues in special hosts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: for Canadian health care providers who are preparing patients for travel to malaria-endemic areas and treating travellers who have returned ill. OBJECTIVE: To provide guidelines on malaria issues related to special hosts. METHODS: CATMAT reviewed all major sources of information on malaria prevention, as well as recent research and national and international epidemiological data, to tailor guidelines to the Canadian context. The evidence-based medicine recommendations were developed with associated rating scales for the strength and quality of the evidence. RECOMMENDATIONS: All people visiting malaria endemic regions should use effective personal protective measures (PPM; topical repellants, bed nets, behavioural choices) and the prescribed chemoprophylaxis. Chemoprophylaxis for pregnant and breastfeeding women and for children requires careful consideration in the context of the pregnancy trimester, the age or size of the infant/child as well as their glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) status. Recommendations for long-term travellers, expatriates and people visiting friends and relatives (VFRs) do not differ markedly from those for short-term travellers. Some underlying medical conditions may make individuals more vulnerable to malaria. In addition, some conditions or their treatment may preclude the use of one or more antimalarial medications.
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 | 0.009 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.008 |
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".