Burden of dengue among febrile patients at the time of chikungunya introduction in Piedecuesta, Colombia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the age-specific incidence of symptomatic dengue and chikungunya in Colombia. METHOD: A passive facility-based fever surveillance study was conducted among individuals with undifferentiated fever. Confirmatory diagnostics included serological and molecular tests in paired samples, and surveillance's underreporting was assessed using capture-recapture methods. RESULTS: Of 839 febrile participants 686 completed the study. There were 33.2% (295/839) dengue infections (51% primary infections), and 35.9% (191/532) of negative dengue cases there were chikungunya cases. On average, dengue cases were younger (median = 18 years) than chikungunya cases (median = 25 years). Thrombocytopaenia and abdominal pain were the main dengue predictors, while presence of rash was the main predictor for chikungunya diagnosis. Underreporting of dengue was 31%; the estimated expansion factors indicate an underreporting rate of dengue cases of threefold for all cases and of almost sixfold for inpatients. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the ongoing coexistence of both arboviruses, a distinct clinical profile of each condition in the study area that could be used by clinicians to generate a differential diagnosis, and the presence of underreporting, mostly among hospitalised cases.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".