A Bayesian approach for estimating typhoid fever incidence from large‐scale facility‐based passive surveillance data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decisions about typhoid fever prevention and control are based on estimates of typhoid incidence and their uncertainty. Lack of specific clinical diagnostic criteria, poorly sensitive diagnostic tests, and scarcity of accurate and complete datasets contribute to difficulties in calculating age-specific population-level typhoid incidence. Using data from the Strategic Typhoid Alliance across Africa and Asia program, we integrated demographic censuses, healthcare utilization surveys, facility-based surveillance, and serological surveillance from Malawi, Nepal, and Bangladesh to account for under-detection of cases. We developed a Bayesian approach that adjusts the count of reported blood-culture-positive cases for blood culture detection, blood culture collection, and healthcare seeking-and how these factors vary by age-while combining information from prior published studies. We validated the model using simulated data. The ratio of observed to adjusted incidence rates was 7.7 (95% credible interval [CrI]: 6.0-12.4) in Malawi, 14.4 (95% CrI: 9.3-24.9) in Nepal, and 7.0 (95% CrI: 5.6-9.2) in Bangladesh. The probability of blood culture collection led to the largest adjustment in Malawi, while the probability of seeking healthcare contributed the most in Nepal and Bangladesh; adjustment factors varied by age. Adjusted incidence rates were within or below the seroincidence rate limits of typhoid infection. Estimates of blood-culture-confirmed typhoid fever without these adjustments results in considerable underestimation of the true incidence of typhoid fever. Our approach allows each phase of the reporting process to be synthesized to estimate the adjusted incidence of typhoid fever while correctly characterizing uncertainty, which can inform decision-making for typhoid prevention and control.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".