MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401113359 · doi:10.1186/s12936-024-05051-5

The Uganda housing modification study - association between housing characteristics and malaria burden in a moderate to high transmission setting in Uganda

2024· article· en· W4401113359 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Joaniter I. Nankabirwa, Samuel Gonahasa, Agaba Katureebe, Peter Mutungi, Martha Nassali, Moses R. Kamya, Nelli Westercamp

Bibliographic record

VenueMalaria Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMalaria Research and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPresident's Malaria InitiativeCenters for Disease Control and PreventionInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsMalariaEnvironmental healthTransmission (telecommunications)Public healthTropical medicineSocioeconomicsMedicineParasitologyAssociation (psychology)Economic growthImmunologyPsychologyEconomicsPathologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Scale up of proven malaria control interventions has not been sufficient to control malaria in Uganda, emphasizing the need to explore innovative new approaches. Improved housing is one such promising strategy. This paper describes housing characteristics and their association with malaria burden in a moderate to high transmission setting in Uganda. METHODS: Between October and November 2021, a household survey was conducted in 1500 randomly selected households in Jinja and Luuka districts. Information on demographics, housing characteristics, use of malaria prevention measures, and proxy indicators of wealth were collected for each household. A finger-prick blood sample was obtained for thick blood smears for malaria from all children aged 6 months to 14 years in the surveyed households. Febrile children had a malaria rapid diagnostics test (RDT) done; positive cases were managed according to national treatment guidelines. Haemoglobin was assessed in children aged < 5 years. Households were stratified as having modern houses (defined as having finished materials for roofs, walls, and floors and closed eaves) or traditional houses (those not meeting the definition of modern house). Associations between malaria burden and house type were estimated using mixed effects models and adjusted for age, wealth, and bed net use. RESULTS: Most (65.5%) of the households surveyed lived in traditional houses. Most of the houses had closed eaves (85.5%), however, the use of other protective features like window/vent screens and installed ceilings was limited (0.4% had screened windows, 2.8% had screened air vents, and 5.2% had ceiling). Overall, 3,443 children were included in the clinical survey, of which 31.4% had a positive smear. RDT test positivity rate was 56.6% among children with fever. Participants living in modern houses had a significantly lower parasite prevalence by microscopy (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR = 0.80]; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71 - 0.90), RDT test positivity rate (aPR = 0.90, 95%CI 0.81 - 0.99), and anaemia (aPR = 0.80, 95%CI 0.65 - 0.97) compared to those in traditional houses. CONCLUSION: The study found that even after adjusting for wealth, higher quality housing had a moderate protective effect against malaria, on top of the protection already afforded by recently distributed nets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.406
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMalaria JournalSame topicMalaria Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207