MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133328190 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18844097

Effectiveness of Community Health Workers in Malaria Control: A Systematic Review in West African Coastal Regions, Ghana

2007· article· en· W7133328190 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kofi Aganoah, Abena Kyei

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMalaria Research and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalariaPublic healthCommunity health workersCommunity healthInclusion (mineral)Intervention (counseling)Malaria preventionQuality (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malaria remains a significant public health issue in West African coastal regions of Ghana, despite ongoing efforts to control its spread. A comprehensive search strategy was employed using electronic databases such as PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies published between and . Studies were selected based on predefined inclusion criteria and assessed for methodological quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The review identified a significant improvement in malaria case detection rates among community members, with an estimated proportion increase of 35% over twelve months after CHW interventions. CHWs play a crucial role in malaria control and their effectiveness can be enhanced through continuous feedback loops to improve intervention strategies. Integrating CHWs into existing health systems is recommended, alongside the establishment of robust monitoring and evaluation frameworks to ensure sustainable impact. 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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicMalaria Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207