Hepatitis E virus in patients with acute hepatitis in Cape Town, South Africa, 2011
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early hepatitis E virus (HEV) seroprevalence studies in South Africa (SA) showed seroprevalence rates of 2 - 10%, and suggested waterborne transmission. More recent studies in Cape Town, SA, reported HEV seroprevalence rates of 28% and 26% in outpatients without liver disease and blood donors, respectively. An association was found with eating pork or bacon/ham. Only 3 human cases of hepatitis E in SA have been reported in the literature. OBJECTIVES: To find evidence of HEV infection in hospitalised patients with acute hepatitis and no other identified cause. METHODS: Leftover serum samples were retrieved for patients negative for hepatitis viruses A, B and C, where no other cause of hepatitis was identified. Samples were tested for HEV by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and IgM and IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). RESULTS: Anti-HEV IgG was detected in 39/132 specimens (29.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 22.4 - 37.8), and anti-HEV IgM in 2/125 specimens (1.6%; 95% CI 0.4 - 5.7). No specimen tested positive by PCR. CONCLUSIONS: IgG seroprevalence found in this study was similar to that previously reported in Cape Town. IgM positivity in 2 patients was not confirmed by PCR. Locally, hepatitis E may not be a common cause of clinically apparent hepatitis that requires hospitalisation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it