Influenza-Like Illness in Lesotho From July 2020 to July 2021: Population-Based Participatory Surveillance Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Participatory surveillance involves at-risk populations reporting their symptoms using technology. In Lesotho, a landlocked country of 2 million people in Southern Africa, laboratory and case-based COVID-19 surveillance systems were complemented by a participatory surveillance system called "LeCellPHIA" (Lesotho Cell Phone Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment Survey). Objective: This report describes the person, place, and time characteristics of influenza-like illness (ILI) in Lesotho from July 15, 2020, to July 15, 2021, and reports the risk ratio of ILI by key demographic variables. Methods: LeCellPHIA employed interviewers to call participants weekly to inquire about ILI. The average weekly incidence rate for the year-long period was created using a Quasi-Poisson model, which accounted for overdispersion. To identify factors associated with an increased risk of ILI, we conducted a weekly data analysis by fitting a multilevel Poisson regression model, which accounted for 3 levels of clustering. Results: The overall response rate for the year of data collection was 75%, which resulted in 122,985 weekly reports from 1776 participants. ILI trends from LeCellPHIA mirrored COVID-19 testing data trends, with an epidemic peak in mid to late January 2021. Overall, any ILI symptoms (eg, fever, dry cough, and shortness of breath) were reported at an average weekly rate of 879 per 100,000 (95% CI 782-988) persons at risk. Compared to persons in the youngest age group (15-19 years), all older age groups had an elevated risk of ILI, with the highest risk of ILI in the oldest age group (≥60 years; risk ratio 2.6, 95% CI 1.7-3.8). Weekly data were shared in near real time with the National COVID-19 Secretariat and other stakeholders to monitor ILI trends, identify and respond to increases in reports of ILI, and inform policies and practices designed to reduce COVID-19 transmission in Lesotho. Conclusions: LeCellPHIA, an innovative and cost-effective system, could be replicated in countries where cell phone ownership is high but internet use is not yet high enough for a web- or app-based surveilance system.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".