Community Health Impacts of the Trident Copper Mine Project in Northwestern Zambia: Results from Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The application of a health impact assessment (HIA) for a large-scale copper mining project in rural Zambia triggered the long-term monitoring and evaluation of determinants of health and health outcomes in communities living in proximity to the mine. Three consecutive cross-sectional surveys were conducted at intervals of four years; thus, at baseline (2011), four (2015) and eight (2019) years into the project’s development. Using the same field and laboratory procedures, the surveys allowed for determining changes in health indicators at the household level, in young children (<5 years), school attendees (9–14 years) and women (15–49 years). Results were compared between communities considered impacted by the project and communities outside the project area (comparison communities). The prevalence of Plasmodium falciparum infection increased in both the impacted and comparison communities between 2011 and 2019 but remained consistently lower in the impacted communities. Stunting in children < 5 years and the prevalence of intestinal parasite infections in children aged 9–14 years mostly decreased. In women of reproductive age, selected health indicators (i.e., anaemia, syphilis, underweight and place of delivery) either remained stable or improved. Impacted communities generally showed better health outcomes than comparison communities, suggesting that the health interventions implemented by the project as a consequence of the HIA have mitigated potential negative effects and enhanced positive effects. Caution is indicated to avoid promotion of health inequalities within and beyond the project area.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".