ABSTRACT
Advancement in remote sensing platforms, sensors, and technology has significantly improved the assessment of hard-to-access areas, such as mountains. Despite these improvements, Africa lags in terms of research work published. This is of great concern as the continent needs more research to achieve sustainable development. Therefore, this study applied a bibliometric analysis of the annual production of publications on the application of remote sensing methods in mountainous environments. In total, 3849 original articles between 1973 and 2021 were used, and the results indicate a steady growth in publications from 2004 (n = 26) to 2021 (n = 504). Considering the source journals, Remote Sensing was the top-ranked, with 453 total publications. The University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences was the highest-ranking affiliation, with 217 articles, and China produced the highest number of publications (n = 217). Keywords used between 1973 and 1997, such as "Canada", "alps", and "GIS", metamorphosed into "remote sensing" between 1998 and 2021. This metamorphosis indicates a change in the areas of interest and an increase in the application of remote sensing methods. Most studies were conducted in the Global North countries, and a few were published in low-impact journals within the African continent. This study can help researchers and scholars better understand the progress and intellectual structure of the field and future research directions in the application of remote sensing methods in mountainous environments.
Subject(s)
Bibliometrics , Publications , Telemetry , China , CanadaABSTRACT
Developing nations will be worst hit by the impacts of climate change because limited resources hinder the spatial reach of climate studies, effort, and subsequent implementation to help with the improvement of livelihoods. Therefore, finding the best-case study is an essential undertaking in environmental assessments. This study explains one systematic approach to selecting a study site for an environmental assessment project. A desktop review of relevant literature, a simple factor scoring assessment process, reliance on expert opinion, and a field survey for ground-truthing were conducted. The desktop review showed the most critical factors to site selection. The scoring of these factors selected those that were crucial for the study. Experts validated the results and suggested the best study site among the ones identified. While the design is simplified, the proposed approach selects the most appropriate study site for environmental assessments.
Subject(s)
Climate ChangeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Enumeration of CD4+ T lymphocytes is important for pre-ART disease staging and screening for opportunistic infections, however access to CD4 testing in resource limited settings is poor. Point of care (POC) technologies can facilitate improved access to CD4 testing. We evaluated the analytical performance of a novel POC device the FACSPresto compared to the FACSCalibur as a reference standard and to the PIMA, a POC device in widespread use in sub-Saharan Africa. METHOD: Specimens were obtained from 253 HIV infected adults. Venous blood samples were analyzed on the FACSPresto and the FACSCalibur, in a subset of 41 samples additional analysis was done on the PIMA. RESULTS: The absolute CD4 count results obtained on the FACSPresto were comparable to those on the FACSCalibur with low absolute (9.5cells/µl) and relative bias (3.2%). Bias in CD4% values was also low (1.06%) with a relative bias of 4.9%. The sensitivity was lower at a CD4 count threshold of ≤350cells/µl compared with ≤500cells/µl (84.9% vs. 92.8%) resulting in a high upward misclassification rate at low CD4 counts. Specificity at thresholds of ≤350cells/µl and ≤500cells/µl were 96.6% and 96.8% respectively. The PIMA had a high absolute (-68.6cells/µl) and relative bias (-10.5%) when compared with the FACSCalibur. At thresholds of ≤350cells/µl and ≤500cells/µl the sensitivity was 100% and 95.5% respectively; specificity was 85.7% and 84.2% respectively. The coefficients of repeatability were 4.13%, 5.29% and 9.8% respectively. DISCUSSION: The analytic performance of the FACSPresto against the reference standard was very good with better agreement and precision than the PIMA. The FACSPresto had comparable sensitivity at a threshold of 500 cells/µl and better specificity than the PIMA. However the FACSPresto showed reduced sensitivity at low CD4 count thresholds. CONCLUSION: The FACSPresto can be reliably used as a POC device for enumerating absolute CD4 count and CD4% values.
