Development of an Index for the Inspection of Aedes aegypti Breeding Sites in Brazil: Multi-criteria Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aedes aegypti is a vector for the transmission of diseases such as dengue fever, chikungunya, Zika fever, and yellow fever. In 2016, over 1 million cases of these diseases were reported in Brazil, which is an alarming public health issue. One of the ways of controlling this disease is by inspecting and neutralizing the places where A. aegypti lays its eggs. The Ministry of Planning, Development, and Administration of Brazil maintains the inspection statistics. OBJECTIVE: We propose a multi-criteria analysis to create an index for A. aegypti inspections reported through the Ministry of Planning, Development, and Administration system of Brazil. METHODS: Based on the repository from urban cleaning services combined with data on inspections conducted by government agencies in several Brazilian cities and municipalities, we selected and combined metrics, which we further ranked using the analytic hierarchy process methodology. We also developed risk maps based on the analytic hierarchy process ranking of the A. aegypti breeding sites. RESULTS: Based on our analysis and the available data, the priority for inspections should consider the number of sick people (weight 0.350), medical evaluations (weight 0.239), inspections (weight 0.201), mosquito breeding sites (weight 0.126), and days of absence from work (weight 0.096). CONCLUSIONS: The proposed index could aid public health practitioners in preventing the appearance of new A. aegypti breeding sites. This information technology application can help solve such public health challenges.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".