Controlling acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease in developing countries: Are we getting closer?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
\n \t\t\tPurpose of review: To describe new developments (2013-2014) in acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and rheumatic heart disease (RHD) relevant to developing countries.Recent findings: Improved opportunities for the primary prevention of ARF now exist, because of point-of-care antigen tests for Streptococcus pyogenes, and clinical decision rules which inform management of pharyngitis without requiring culture results. There is optimism that a vaccine, providing protection against many ARF-causing S. pyogenes strains, may be available in coming years. Collaborative approaches to RHD control, including World Heart Federation initiatives and the development of registers, offer promise for better control of this disease. New data on RHD-associated costs provide persuasive arguments for better government-level investment in primary and secondary prevention. There is expanding knowledge of potential biomarkers and immunological profiles which characterize ARF/RHD, and genetic mutations conferring ARF/RHD risk, but as yet no new diagnostic testing strategy is ready for clinical application.Summary: Reduction in the disease burden and national costs of ARF and RHD are major priorities. New initiatives in the primary and secondary prevention of ARF/RHD, novel developments in pathogenesis and biomarker research and steady progress in vaccine development, are all causes for optimism for improving control of ARF/RHD, which affect the poorest of the poor.\n
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".