Hepatitis B Virus Exposure, Seroprotection Status, and Susceptibility in Health Care Workers From Lao People’s Democratic Republic: Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Despite the high prevalence of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in adults in Lao People's Democratic Republic (Lao PDR), Lao health care workers (HCWs) have previously been shown to have low levels of protection against infection. Furthermore, the prevalence of hepatitis D virus (HDV), which increases disease severity in individuals infected with HBV, is not known in Lao PDR. Objective: This study aimed to estimate the exposure and seroprotection against HBV, as well as exposure to HDV, in Lao HCWs from 5 provinces. Methods: In 2020, a total of 666 HCWs aged 20 to 65 years from 5 provinces of Lao PDR were recruited, and their sera were tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to determine their HBV and HDV coinfection status. Results: HBV exposure, as indicated by the presence of anti-hepatitis B core antibodies, was 40.1% (267/666) overall and significantly higher for HCWs from Oudomxay province (21/31, 67.7%; adjusted odds ratio 3.69, 95% CI 1.68-8.12; P=.001). The prevalence of hepatitis B surface antigen was 5.4% (36/666) overall and increased with age, from 3.6% (9/248) in those aged ≤30 years to 6.8% (8/118) in those aged ≥50 years. Only 28.7% (191/666) of participants had serological indication of immunization. We could find no evidence for HDV exposure in this study. Conclusions: The study found intermediate hepatitis B surface antigen prevalence among HCWs in Lao PDR, with no evidence of HDV coinfection. Notably, a significant proportion of HCWs remains susceptible to HBV, indicating a substantial gap in seroprotection against the 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".