MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283818831 · doi:10.4269/ajtmh.22-0109

Evaluation of Strongyloides Awareness and Knowledge among Canadian Physicians Caring for Patients At Risk for Severe Strongyloidiasis: A National Cross-sectional Survey

2022· article· en· W4283818831 on OpenAlexaffabout
Samuel De l’Étoile-Morel, Faheel Naeem, Mohammad Alghounaim, Makeda Semret, Cédric P. Yansouni, Michael Libman, Sapha Barkati

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasites and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's HospitalMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrongyloidiasisStrongyloides stercoralisCross-sectional studyMedicineStrongyloidesEnvironmental healthFamily medicineHelminthsImmunologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, a substantial proportion of migrants come from strongyloidiasis-endemic regions. Systematic screening for Strongyloides is not performed in immunocompromised patients in whom this infection could be potentially fatal. We aim to assess the level of Strongyloides awareness and knowledge among Canadian physicians caring for immunocompromised patients and identify factors currently associated with screening. Using an online survey distributed through Canadian medical associations, we collected information on physicians' demographics, practice setting, overall awareness and knowledge of Strongyloides, and current practices. Descriptive analysis and logistic regression models were performed to identify the factors associated with Strongyloides screening. Nineteen national and provincial medical associations agreed to participate. Between November 2020 and August 2021, 368 of 5,194 (7%) physicians that were contacted responded to our survey. Quebec (46%) and Ontario (24%) were the most responsive. Sixty-nine percent of respondents practiced medicine in academic settings. Infectious disease (ID) specialists/medical microbiologists (38%) followed by nephrologists (33%) were the most represented. Most respondents (95%) had heard about Strongyloides. However, 36% of non-ID specialists considered themselves unfamiliar. Forty percent of respondents did not or rarely performed screening for strongyloidiasis in high-risk populations. Screening was associated with younger-aged physicians (odds ratio [OR] 2.35; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-5.18), physicians who frequently served migrants (OR 3.33; 95% CI 1.44-7.66), or those who had training in global health and ID/medical microbiology (OR 3.71; 95% CI 1.21-11.34 and OR 46.42; 95% CI 15.89-135.59, respectively). Our survey suggests a general lack of knowledge of Strongyloides among Canadian physicians that is associated with low rates of screening in high-risk populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and HygieneSame topicParasites and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207