PREVALENCE OF SYPHILIS AND HIV INFECTION IN BLOOD DONORS IN COSMOPOLITAN LAHORE DURING THE YEAR 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To identify the reasons for increase in number of patients suffering from syphilis, among the blood donors reporting in Lahore. SELECTED BLOOD BANKS: Chughtai Medical Laboratories, Gulberg. Doctors Hospital, Johar town. National Hospital, DHA, Lahore. SAMPLE SIZE: samples were collected from 23,156 donors. STUDY DURATION: st st From 1 January, 2014 to 31 December 2014. METHODS: Large numbers of blood donors were screened for treponema antibodies in the serum. ARCHITECT SYPHILIS TP TEST is a chemiluminescent micro particle immunoassay (CMIA) for the qualitative detection of antibody to Treponema pallidum (TP) in human serum. RESULTS: Out of 23,156 blood donors screened, 1124 donors (4.9%) were detected positive for syphilis. One donor was HIV positive (0.0043%). Among the infected donors, 29.92% cases were O +ve, while only 1.18% cases were AB-ve blood groups. HIV positive individual was B+ve blood group. CONCLUSION: The number of syphilis patients is on the rise in Lahore due to Treponerma Pallidum, which is evident from screening of large number of blood donors in high-turnout blood banks in Lahore. Moreover, public awareness campaign is required to educate the citizens regarding the complications and spread of this disease
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".