MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413067724 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v17n4p59

Point-of-Care Urinalysis Dipstick Screening for Urinary Tract Infections in Sierra Leone

2025· article· W4413067724 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Gabrielle Gundermann, S. S. Herrick, Khanjan Mehta

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Tract Infections Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGrand Challenges Canada
KeywordsDipstickUrinalysisMedicineSierra leoneUrinary systemPoint-of-care testingUrineDescriptive statisticsIntensive care medicineFamily medicineEmergency medicineInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are prevalent infections especially among women and can result in complications including pyelonephritis, sepsis, and miscarriage. Urine dipstick tests are an alternative diagnostic method to urinalysis for low- and middle-income countries that lack resources for diagnostic testing. This study evaluated the implementation of a UTI screening program with an affordable 3-parameter urine dipstick test in Sierra Leone. The study aimed to determine a healthcare network’s ability to adopt screening, patient acceptability of UTI screening, and patient willingness to pay for screening. Quantitative screening data and qualitative interview data were collected and analysed via a multiple linear regression and general inductive approach, respectively. The results suggest higher earning occupations and engagement of community leadership in sensitization are associated with increased willingness of patients to undergo screening. Furthermore, screening willingness only decreased at the highest cost level, and a consensus existed on an optimal price point. Qualitative results supported implementation through general clinic operations with a systematic screening process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.352 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicUrinary Tract Infections ManagementFrench-language works237,207