MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2889888029 · doi:10.4236/jtr.2018.63020

Increasing Detection and Confirmation of Tuberculosis in Children in Southern Ethiopia: Pooled Samples Tested Using Microscopy and Xpert

2018· article· en· W2889888029 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Daniel G. Datiko, Mulualem A. Gadena, Mubarek A. Yassin, Kefyalew T. Garie, Moges Desta Ormago, Luís E. Cuevas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Tuberculosis Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGrand Challenges Canada
KeywordsMedicineGeneXpert MTB/RIFSputumTuberculosisInternal medicineGastric lavageGastroenterologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Childhood tuberculosis accounts for about 10% of estimated TB cases in the world. Despite advances in diagnostics, childhood TB remains a challenge. We evaluated pooling method and testing with GeneXpert MTB/RIF in southern Ethiopia. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study in presumptive TB children st, 2nd and pooled samples. Results: Of 340 presumptive TB cases enrolled, 96 and 244 children submitted gastric aspirate and sputum samples respectively. Of 1020 samples collected (282 gastric aspirate and 738 sputum samples), 38 (3.7%) were positive by Xpert (10 (3.5%) from gastric aspirate and 28 (3.8%) from sputum sample). Similarly, 8 (1.2%) of sputum samples were positive by ZN but none from gastric aspirate. Of 244 children who submitted sputum samples, 3 (1.2%) were bacteriologically positive compared to 12 (4.9%) by Xpert. Of 96 children who submitted gastric aspirate samples, none were positive by ZN while 5 (5.2%) were positive by Xpert. Of bacteriologically confirmed TB cases 0.9% was by ZN and 4.7% by Xpert, an increase of 3.8%. Pooled testing increased positivity by 0.3% for ZN and 1.5% by Xpert compared to the 1st sample. Conclusions: Xpert MTB/RIF testing increases yield compared to ZN testing for gastric aspirate samples. The same-day approach and pooling samples improves efficient use of cartridge, reduce the number of visits for seeking diagnosis and save resources.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Tuberculosis Research→Same topicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology→French-language works237,207→