Urogenital <i>Schistosoma haematobium</i> Cases at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, London (1998-2018), and Suggested Pragmatic Follow-up Pathway for Non-endemic Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Characteristics of confirmed urogenital Schistosoma haematobium infections and outcomes in non-endemic regions are scarce in the literature and there is a minimal evidence base for appropriate management in this setting. Specific schistosomal urinary and urological complications include risk of hydronephrosis, renal impairment, and malignant transformation. Therefore, approach to follow-up should be robust and systematic. Methods This is a retrospective case-note review of all patients with confirmed S haematobium infection (defined as visible ova in terminal urine and/or histopathological diagnosis on biopsy) at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases (HTD), London, between 1998 and 2018. Outcomes of follow-up were reviewed and formulated into a pragmatic guideline for follow-up of these patients in this setting. Results A majority of the 186 patients with confirmed S haematobium infection presented before 2012. Young, male migrants were at highest risk of complications from chronic infection and were most prone to being lost to follow-up. One patient was referred with squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder found on biopsy with S haematobium infection. Conclusions We put forward a pragmatic pathway for S haematobium investigation and follow-up for patients presenting to nonendemic settings with the current resource capabilities of the United Kingdom.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".