Prolonged diarrhea among under-five children in Bangladesh: Burden and risk factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND: Prolonged (duration >7 to 13 days) diarrhea (ProD) in under-five children is a universal health problem including Bangladesh. Data on epidemiology and associated or risk factors of ProD are limited, particularly in Bangladesh where a high burden of ProD is reported. This study intended to assess the case load of ProD and its associated or risk factors compared to acute diarrhea (AD, duration ≤7 days). METHODS: We analyzed the data collected between 1996-2014 from a hospital-based Diarrheal-Disease-Surveillance-System (DDSS) in the 'Dhaka Hospital' of International Centre for Diarrhoeal Diseases, Bangladesh (icddr,b). The DDSS enrolled a 2% systematic sample, regardless of age, sex, and diarrhea severity. The data included information on socio-demographic factors, environmental history, clinical characteristics, nutritional status, and diarrhea-pathogens. After cleaning of data, relevant information of 21,566 under-five children were available who reported with ≤13 days diarrhea (including AD and ProD), and their data were analyzed. Variables found significantly associated with ProD compared to AD in bi-variate analysis were used in logistic regression model after checking the multicollinearity between independent variables. RESULTS: The mean±SD age of the children was 14.9±11.7 months and 40.4% were female; 7.6% had ProD and 92.4% had AD. Age <12 months, mucoid- or bloody-stool, warmer months (April-September), drug used at home before seeking care from hospital, and history of diarrhea within last one month were found associated with ProD (p<0.05); however, rotavirus infection was less common in children with ProD (p<0.05). ProD children more often needed inpatient admission than AD children (14.4 vs. 6.3, p<0.001). Case fatality rate of ProD vs. AD was 0.3% (n = 5) vs. 0.1% (n- = 22) respectively (p = 0.051). CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion (7.6%) of under-five children reporting to icddr,b hospital suffered from ProD. Understanding the above-mentioned associated or risk factors is likely to help policy makers formulating appropriate strategies for alleviating the burden and effectively managing ProD in under-five children.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".