MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311227539 · doi:10.4269/ajtmh.22-0527

High Sensitivity of Mobile Phone Microscopy Screening for Schistosoma haematobium in Azaguié, Côte d’Ivoire

2022· article· en· W4311227539 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean T. Coulibaly, Kigbafori D. Silué, Maxim Armstrong, María Díaz de León Derby, Michael V. D’Ambrosio, Daniel A. Fletcher, Jennifer Keiser, Karla Fisher, Jason R. Andrews, Isaac I. Bogoch

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasites and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryDepartment of Medicine, University of TorontoUC Berkeley College of ChemistryStanford Bio-XSchool of Medicine, Stanford UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversität Basel
KeywordsSchistosoma haematobiumSchistosomiasisMobile phoneCote d ivoireMicroscopySchistosomaNeglected tropical diseasesEnvironmental healthBiologyMedicineImmunologySchistosoma mansoniPathologyHelminthsComputer scienceDiseaseTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schistosomiasis infections continue to impact African settings disproportionately, and there is an urgent need for novel tools to evaluate infection control and elimination strategies at the community level. Mobile phone microscopes are portable and semiautomated devices with multiple applications for screening neglected tropical diseases. In a community-based schistosomiasis screening program in Azaguié, Côte d'Ivoire, mobile phone microscopy demonstrated a sensitivity of 85.7% (95% CI: 69.7-95.2%) and specificity of 93.3% (95% CI: 87.7-96.9%) for Schistosoma haematobium identification compared with conventional light microscopy, and 95% sensitivity (95% CI: 74.1-99.8%) with egg concentrations of five or more per 10 mL of urine. Mobile phone microscopy is a promising tool for schistosomiasis control and elimination efforts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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