MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Current relevance of arbovirus infections in transfusion medicine

2010· article· en· W1558852272 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anton Andonov

Bibliographic record

VenueISBT Science Series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Vectors
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransfusion medicineArbovirus InfectionsArbovirusMedicineIntensive care medicineVirologyBlood transfusionImmunologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arboviruses are maintained in nature through biological transmission between susceptible vertebrate hosts by haematophagous (blood feeding) arthropods, such as mosquitoes, ticks, midges and sandflies.Biological transmission can also be transovarian (from an infected female to offspring) and venereal (from a vertically infected male directly to a female vector).Originally, this large group of viruses was called ARBORviruses, a short laboratory name coined in part by William C. Reeves from the words ARthropod BORne viruses; however, the middle 'R' was later dropped to avoid potential misidentification with trees (arbor in Latin).The earliest attempts to isolate arboviruses were initiated during the 1930s when Murray Valley encephalitis, Rift Valley fever, St Louis encephalitis, Russian spring-summer encephalitis, Western, Eastern and Venezuelan equine encephalitis viruses were discovered [1,2].Today, around 520 arboviruses have been catalogued of which over 100 infect humans.This large group of RNA viruses is quite heterogenous both in terms of their genetic features as well as in the variety of disease they cause.Currently, the term arbovirus has long lost its taxonomic significance and is only suggestive of the common arthropodborne transmission strategy.At present, arboviruses are classified among six virus families: Flaviviridae (genus Flavivirus), Togaviridae (genus Alphavirus), Bunyaviridae (genus Orthobunyavirus, Nairovirus, Phlebovirus), Reoviridae (genus Orbivirus, Coltivirus, Seadornavirus-proposed), Rhabdoviridae (genus Vesiculovirus) and Orthomyxoviridae (genus Thogotovirus).An abbreviated list of medically important arboviruses is presented in Table 1.Other arboviruses for which the available information is insufficient, or which do not seem to cause a disease (although data for pathogenicity may become available in the future) were not considered for this review.Typically, the arbovirus transmission cycle in nature involves enzootic amplification (between the arthropod and small rodents or birds) which at times can spill over domestic animals or humans (West Nile, Rift Valley fever, Japanese encephalitis viruses) or human-arthropod-human urban transmission in the case of Dengue and Chikungunya infection (the latter can also be maintained in nature through enzootic (sylvatic) amplification between mosquitoes and non-human primates.For the most part, various arboviral infections result in mild or no apparent clinical symptoms, with a brief viraemia followed by specific immune response.Whenever there is a clinical presentation, several general syndromes could predominate in individual patients:(1) Self-limited viral fever with or without exanthema and non-specific flu-like symptoms (classical Dengue, West Nile fever, Rift Valley fever, Chikungunya viruses).( 2) Febrile illness with skin rash, arthralgia and ⁄ or arthritis, myalgia, fatigue, lethargy (Chikungunya, Ross River, Barmah Forest and Sindbis-related viruses, such as Ockelbo and Pogosta viruses).(3) Viral encephalitis, aseptic meningitis, flaccid paralysis (West Nile, St Louis encephalitis, Eastern, Western and Venezuelan equine encephalitis, Murray River Valley, Japanese encephalitis and tick-borne encephalitis Virus (TBEV).(4) Viral haemorrhagic fever, fulminent hepatitis or jaundice (Dengue, Yellow Fever, Rift Valley fever, Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever viruses).Disease manifestation in infected individuals varies accordingly with respect to host factors such as immune status with homologous or heterologous viruses, immunosuppression, age, race, etc. Secondary Dengue infection caused by a different serotype from the primary infection is considered as a higher risk for Dengue haemorrhagic fever ⁄ Dengue shock syndrome (DHF ⁄ DSS) especially in young children.On the other hand, certain level of heterologous immunity against one or more previous Dengue episodes may have a net positive effect on the outcome of a secondary ⁄ tertiary infection [3-5].African ancestry and Afro-Brazilian-Cuban-Caribbean ethnicity are protective against DHF ⁄ DSS compared to Caucasians [6-8].Recently, arbovirus incursions have increased on a global scale with a tendency to cause large epidemics; West Nile and Chikungunya virus infections are just few wellpublicized examples.Others such as Dengue and Japanese

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.006

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISBT Science SeriesSame topicViral Infections and VectorsFrench-language works237,207