The Consortium on Newborn Screening in Africa for sickle cell disease: study rationale and methodology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a common condition within sub-Saharan Africa and associated with high under-5 mortality (U5M). The American Society of Hematology instituted the Consortium on Newborn Screening in Africa (CONSA) for SCD, a 7-country network of sites to implement standardized newborn hemoglobinopathy screening and early intervention for children with SCD in sub-Saharan Africa. CONSA's overall hypothesis is that early infant SCD screening and entry into standardized, continuous care will reduce U5M compared with historical estimates in the region. Primary trial objectives are to determine the population-based birth incidence of SCD and effectiveness of early standardized care for preventing early mortality consortium-wide at each country's site(s). Secondary objectives are to establish universal screening and early interventions for SCD within clinical networks of CONSA partners and assess trial implementation. Outcomes will be evaluated from data collected using a shared patient registry. Standardized trial procedures will be implemented among designated birth populations in 7 African countries whose programs met eligibility criteria. Treatment protocol includes administering antibacterial and antimalarial prophylaxis and standard childhood vaccinations against infections commonly affecting children with SCD. Infants with a positive screen and confirmation of SCD within the catchment areas defined by each consortium partner will be enrolled in the clinical intervention protocol and followed regularly until age of 5 years. Effectiveness of these early interventions, along with culturally appropriate family education and counseling, will be evaluated by comparing U5M in the enrolled cohort to estimated preprogram data. Here, we describe the methodology planned for this trial.
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 | 0.027 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.004 |
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".