Untangling Complexity: Assessing the Joint Effects of Population Composition and Context on Perceived Exposure to Onchocerciasis in Coastal Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Onchocerciasis volvulus is the second highest infectious cause of blindness in the world, and is estimated to affect 37 million people, of whom 99% reside in sub-Saharan Africa. As a public health problem the disease is most closely associated with Africa, where it constitutes a serious obstacle to socio-economic development. Using the human ecology triad, this paper evaluates the dynamic interplay of population, habitat and behavioural factors in predicting perceived exposure to onchocerciasis among coastal inhabitants in Tanzania. Generalized linear models with log-log link function were fitted to cross-sectional survey data on 1253 individuals in three contiguous coastal regions. A significant proportion of respondents (28%) perceived that they were exposed to onchocerciasis. Residents in urban locations irrespective of wealth status were less likely to report living in onchocerciasis endemic environment compared with their rural counterparts. This is understandable given that urban areas of Tanga and Dar es Salaam are definitely non-endemic and perceived risk of onchocerciasis is related to the fact of living in an endemic area with active onchocercasis transmission. Individuals who had attained secondary (OR=0.51, p<0.01) or tertiary education (OR=0.37, p<0.001), and reported easy access to health facility (OR=0.53, p<0.001) were all less likely to report perceived exposure to onchocerciasis. This is not surprising because higher level of education and easy access to health facilities are characteristics of urban compared with rural areas. Policy implications suggest the need for the Tanzanian national neglected tropical disease control programme (TZNTDCP) to intensify health and educational campaigns at the community level and address susceptibility of vulnerable populations to the disease especially, for rural dwellers.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".