Proceedings of the African Pathologists Summit; March 22-23, 2013; Dakar, Senegal: a summary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: This report presents the proceedings of the African Pathologists Summit, held under the auspices of the African Organization for Research and Training in Cancer. Objectives: To deliberate on the challenges and constraints of the practice of pathology in Sub-Saharan Africa and the avenues for addressing them. Participants: Collaborating organizations included the American Society for Clinical Pathology; Association of Pathologists of Nigeria; British Division of the International Academy of Pathology; College of Pathologists of East, Central and Southern Africa; East African Division of the International Academy of Pathology; Friends of Africa-United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology Initiative; International Academy of Pathology; International Network for Cancer Treatment and Research; National Cancer Institute; National Health and Laboratory Service of South Africa; Nigerian Postgraduate Medical College; Royal College of Pathologists; West African Division of the International Academy of Pathology; and Faculty of Laboratory Medicine of the West African College of Physicians. Evidence: Information on the status of the practice of pathology was based on the experience of the participants, who are current or past practitioners of pathology or are involved in pathology education and research in Sub-Saharan Africa. Consensus Process: The deliberations were carried out through presentations and working discussion groups. Conclusions: The significant lack of professional and technical personnel, inadequate infrastructure, limited training opportunities, poor funding of pathology services in Sub-Saharan Africa, and their significant impact on patient care were noted. The urgency of addressing these issues was recognized, and the recommendations that were made are contained in this report.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".