Protocol for a cluster-randomised non-inferiority trial of one versus two doses of ivermectin for the control of scabies using a mass drug administration strategy (the RISE study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Scabies is a significant contributor to global morbidity, affecting approximately 200 million people at any time. Scabies is endemic in many resource-limited tropical settings. Bacterial skin infection (impetigo) frequently complicates scabies infestation in these settings. Community-wide ivermectin-based mass drug administration (MDA) is an effective control strategy for scabies in island settings, with a single round of MDA reducing population prevalence by around 90%. However, current two-dose regimens present a number of barriers to programmatic MDA implementation. We designed the Regimens of Ivermectin for Scabies Elimination (RISE) trial to investigate whether one-dose MDA may be as effective as two-dose MDA in controlling scabies in high-prevalence settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: RISE is a cluster-randomised non-inferiority trial. The study will be conducted in 20 isolated villages in Western Province of Solomon Islands where population prevalence of scabies is approximately 20%. Villages will be randomly allocated to receive either one dose or two doses of ivermectin-based MDA in a 1:1 ratio. The primary objective of the study is to determine if ivermectin-based MDA with one dose is as effective as MDA with two doses in reducing the prevalence of scabies after 12 months. Secondary objectives include the effect of ivermectin-based MDA on impetigo prevalence after 12 and 24 months, the prevalence of scabies at 24 months after the intervention, the impact on presentation to health facilities with scabies and impetigo, and the safety of one-dose and two-dose MDA. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been approved by the ethics review committees of the Solomon Islands and the Royal Children's Hospital, Australia. Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and in meetings with the Solomon Islands Ministry of Health and Medical Services and participating communities. TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12618001086257. Date registered: 28 June 2018.
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 | 0.035 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.113 | 0.019 |
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".