MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1538700040 · doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000943

Vaccines for the Leishmaniases: Proposals for a Research Agenda

2011· article· en· W1538700040 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Carlos Henrique Nery Costa, Nathan C. Peters, Sandra Regina Maruyama, Eldo Cardoso de Brito, Isabel Kinney Ferreira de Miranda Santos

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesInstituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical, Universidade Nova de LisboaUniversidade Federal de Ouro PretoDirectorate for Biological SciencesNational Institutes of HealthFundação Oswaldo CruzMinistério da SaúdeTehran University of Medical Sciences and Health ServicesUniversity of LeedsUniversidade Federal de Minas GeraisUniversidade Nova de LisboaMcMaster UniversityUniversidade de LisboaRosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science
KeywordsNeglected tropical diseasesPolitical scienceLeishmaniasisLibrary scienceMedicinePublic healthImmunologyComputer sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Symposium on Leishmaniasis Vaccines, held in Olinda, Brazil, on March 9–11, 2009, congregated international experts who conduct research on vaccines against the leishmaniases. The questions that were raised during that meeting and the ensuing discussions are compiled in this report and may assist in guiding a research agenda. A group to further discussion on issues raised in this policy platform has been set up at http://groups.google.com/group/leishvaccines-l.

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)0.101
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1010.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0190.033
Open science0.0070.013
Research integrity0.0640.036
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.010

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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.154 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations107
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS neglected tropical diseasesSame topicResearch on Leishmaniasis StudiesFrench-language works237,207