Changing trends in viral hepatitis mortality in East and Southeast Asia between 1987 and 2015 and its prediction until 2030
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Trends in long-term mortality rates for viral hepatitis in East and Southeast Asia have been rarely reported. The aim of our study was to explore the long-term trends in viral hepatitis mortality rates in East and Southeast Asian countries between 1987 and 2015 and provide predictions of mortality to 2030. METHODS: We obtained viral hepatitis mortality data from the WHO Mortality Database for six East and Southeast Asian countries between 1987 and 2015. We produced choropleth maps of viral hepatitis mortality rates in 1987 and 2015 in East and Southeast Asia to illustrate geographic variations. We made predictions of mortality rates for each included country until the year 2030 using a series of joinpoint models. RESULTS: Viral hepatitis mortality rates declined in China (the average annual percent change (AAPC) = -5.1%, 95% CI: -7.5, -2.6), Singapore (AAPC = -5.4%, 95% CI: -7.5, -3.2), and the Philippines (AAPC = -3.4%, 95% CI: -4.9, -1.8). In contrast, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Malaysia have experienced increasing trends in mortality rates, followed by decreasing trends. Our predictions indicate that all countries will experience slight to moderate downward trends until 2030. CONCLUSION: Favourable decreasing trends have been noted in East and Southeast Asian countries, which may not only inform the control and management of viral hepatitis in this region but also guide the prevention of viral hepatitis deaths in another region with a similar viral hepatitis epidemic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".