Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plasmodium falciparum malaria developed in an African-born traveler who returned to Canada after visiting Nigeria. While there, she took artesunate prophylactically. Isolates had an elevated 50 % inhibitory concentration to artemisinin, artesunate, and artemether, compared with that of other African isolates. Inappropriate use of artemisinin derivatives can reduce P. falciparum susceptibility. Artemisinin derivatives were recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of Plasmodium falciparum malaria in North America and are available through the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and through Health Canada (1–3). Artemisininbased combination therapy (ACT) remains the most effective therapy for P. falciparum malaria throughout the world, with the possible exception of the Thailand–Cambodia border (4). Because of the large numbers in the Toronto area of returning travelers and recent immigrants who have returned to countries of origin and visited friends and relatives, the Public Health Laboratory (Toronto) identifies ≈200 positive malaria smears annually; most P. falciparum isolates have come from sub-Saharan Africa. Evidence has indicated that such travelers tend not to seek medical advice before travel and are therefore at high risk of acquiring malaria (5). The Patient A 38-year-old Nigerian-born woman, who lived in the Toronto area (and has a good ability to recount her experiences), returned to Lagos, Nigeria, for a visit in January 2009. She did not seek pretravel advice. On arrival in Lagos, the woman purchased artesunate locally and began
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.265 | 0.051 |
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".