MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1577031982 · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(15)00027-4

Approaches to demonstration of Ebola virus vaccine efficacy

2015· article· en· W1577031982 on OpenAlexaffabout
Philip R. Krause, Marco Cavaleri, Gina Coleman, Marion F. Gruber

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Infectious Diseases · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEbola virusEbola vaccineClinical trialDiseaseMedicineVirologyVirusIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After rapid advancement of several promising Ebola virus disease vaccine candidates into phase 1 clinical trials, large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that aim to show that an investigational vaccine prevents the clinical occurrence of Ebola virus disease have been initiated. The recent decline in Ebola virus disease incidence in affected regions is very welcome news from a humanitarian and public health perspective, but it might hamper direct assessment of vaccine effectiveness based on clinical Ebola virus disease endpoints.

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)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.160 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Infectious DiseasesSame topicViral Infections and Outbreaks ResearchFrench-language works237,207