Association of cerebral malaria and TNF-α levels: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cerebral malaria is the most severe form of infection with Plasmodium falciparum characterized by a highly inflammatory response. This systematic review aimed to investigate the association between TNF-α levels and cerebral malaria. METHODS: This review followed the Preferred Reporting of Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The search was performed at PubMed, LILACS, Scopus, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, OpenGrey and Google Scholar. We have included studies of P. falciparum-infected humans with or without cerebral malaria and TNF-α dosage level. All studies were evaluated using a risk of bias tool and the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Our results have identified 2338 studies, and 8 articles were eligible according to this systematic review inclusion criteria. Among the eight articles, five have evaluated TNF- α plasma dosage, while two have evaluated at the blood and one at the brain (post-Morten). Among them, only five studies showed higher TNF-α levels in the cerebral malaria group compared to the severe malaria group. Methodological problems were identified regarding sample size, randomization and blindness, but no risk of bias was detected. CONCLUSION: Although the results suggested that that TNF-α level is associated with cerebral malaria, the evidence is inconsistent and imprecise. More observational studies evaluating the average TNF-alpha are needed.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".