Association between the presence of DHPS and DHFR resistant markers and the level of parasitaemia, preterm birth and low birth weight among pregnant women in Ogun state, Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: There have been reports of resistance to Intermittent Preventive Therapy with Sulphadoxine-Pyrimethamine, probably due to the accumulation of mutations at the dihydrofolate reductase and dihydropteroate synthase genes of the malaria parasite. This study aimed to determine the association between the presence of dihydrofolate reductase markers and dihydropteroate synthase markers and birth outcomes (parasitaemia, low birth weight and preterm delivery) among pregnant women in Ogun State, Nigeria. Methodology: This was a cross-sectional study of pregnant women, 28- and 40-week gestational age with malaria parasitaemia, who were screened for malaria parasitaemia with rapid diagnostic test kits, thick and thin blood films for microscopy, and DNA analysis using PCR during the antenatal clinic. Gestational age at delivery and birth weight were obtained from the delivery records. Data were entered into SPSS version 22.0. Bivariate analysis of categorical variables was done using the Chi-square or Fisher's exact test as appropriate. The significance level was set at p<0.05. Result: Of the 270 women, only 30 (11.1%) of the participants had parasitaemia on microscopy. The mean parasite density was 5,540 microliter/ml ±1,090.66. The mean gestational age at delivery was 39 weeks 3 days ±1.67, while the mean birthweight was 3.1kg ±0.46. Bivariate analysis showed statistically significant associations between the presence of resistance markers to sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine and the occurrence of microscopic parasitaemia and adverse birth outcomes (preterm delivery and low birth weight). Conclusion: The presence of Triple, quadruple and quintuple resistant markers may be associated with severe parasitaemia (> 5000/mcl), preterm delivery, and low birthweight.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".