Addressing Anemia in High‐Altitude Populations: Global Impact, Prevalence, Challenges, and Potential Solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anemia, a global health challenge affecting a quarter of the global population, results from diverse causes such as nutritional deficiencies, chronic diseases, and genetic factors. It disproportionately impacts women of reproductive age and children, leading to significant morbidity and mortality. While high-altitude populations face unique diagnostic challenges due to natural hemoglobin increases, the current World Health Organization cutoffs often overestimate anemia in these regions. Altitude corrections significantly alter prevalence rates, particularly in South American children, leading to misdiagnosis. Proposed solutions include population-specific thresholds and iron status markers like serum hepcidin, though economic constraints and limited test availability remain challenges. Tailored strategies informed by genetic research highlight adaptations in Tibetan and Ethiopian highlanders, demonstrating the need for region-specific approaches. Socioeconomic factors exacerbate anemia in high-altitude areas. Addressing anemia requires updated diagnostic criteria, personalized strategies, and increased awareness to ensure accurate assessments and interventions in diverse populations, especially those residing at high altitudes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".