Malaria and Helminthic Co-Infection during Pregnancy in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malaria and helminthic co-infection during pregnancy causes fetomaternal haemorrhage and foetal growth retardation. This study determined the pooled burden of pregnancy malaria and helminthic co-infection in sub-Saharan Africa. CINAHL, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were used to retrieve data from the literature, without restricting language and publication year. The Joanna Briggs Institute’s critical appraisal tool for prevalence studies was used for quality assessment. STATA Version 14.0 was used to conduct the meta-analysis. The I2 statistics and Egger’s test were used to test heterogeneity and publication bias. The random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence at a 95% confidence interval (CI). The review protocol has been registered in PROSPERO, with the number CRD42019144812. In total, 24 studies (n = 14,087 participants) were identified in this study. The pooled analysis revealed that 20% of pregnant women were co-infected by malaria and helminths in sub-Saharan Africa. The pooled prevalence of malaria and helminths were 33% and 35%, respectively. The most prevalent helminths were Hookworm (48%), Ascaris lumbricoides (37%), and Trichuris trichiura (15%). Significantly higher malaria and helminthic co-infection during pregnancy were observed. Health systems in sub-Saharan Africa must implement home-grown innovative solutions to underpin context-specific policies for the early initiation of effective intermittent preventive therapy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".