MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133222553 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18841376

Public Health Workshops and Handwashing Habits Among Smallholder Farmers in Sudan: A Systematic Review of Interventions in Morocco

2007· article· en· W7133222553 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abdullah Chaker, Ahmed El-Hafedh

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthPsychological interventionAgricultureHygienePublic health interventionsHealth promotionScale (ratio)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public health interventions targeting handwashing among smallholder farmers in Sudan have been proposed to reduce disease transmission. A comprehensive search strategy was employed to identify relevant studies. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Studies revealed that workshops significantly improved handwashing habits among smallholder farmers in Morocco, with a mean increase of 30%. Public health workshops are effective in promoting handwashing practices among smallholder farmers. Further research is needed to validate these findings in Sudan. Integrate public health education into agricultural extension programmes and monitor the impact over time. Public Health Workshops, Handwashing Habits, Smallholder Farmers, Disease Transmission, Morocco Treatment effect was estimated with $\text{logit}(p_i)=\beta_0+\beta^\top X_i$, and uncertainty reported using confidence-interval based inference.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207