Status, Needs, and Perspectives on the Practice of Endourology in Africa: a Continental Survey of 21 Reference Centers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endourology occupies an important place in modern urological practice. Compared with conventional surgery, it offers improved safety and patients experience less severe postoperative effects. Its use requires a certain level of equipment and technical skills. In many developed countries, it has been established for years and its practice has become routine. In Africa, it is still not very practical or even non-existent in certain reference centers. This survey conducted among the heads of urology departments or training coordinators in African referral centers defines the current practice of endourology. According to the needs and perspectives identified, it is important, if not essential, to create services or reference centers specializing in endourology. The role of these centers will be to take care of patients and train urologists in technical skills. The creation of a sub-regional and international network could contribute to the development of this practice. Multi-stakeholder cooperation (inter-state, with non-governmental organizations, companies or corporations) is also necessary.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".