MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1852143235 · doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0003697

Target Product Profile (TPP) for Chagas Disease Point-of-Care Diagnosis and Assessment of Response to Treatment

2015· article· en· W1852143235 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Analı́a Porrás, Zaida E. Yadón, Jaime Altcheh, Constança Britto, Gabriela Costa Chaves, Laurence Flévaud, Olindo Assis Martins‐Filho, Isabela Ribeiro, Alejandro G. Schijman, Maria Aparecida Shikanai‐Yasuda, Sergio Sosa‐Estáni, Eric Stobbaerts, Fábio Zicker

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrypanosoma species research and implications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y TécnicasWorld Health Organization
KeywordsNeglected tropical diseasesMultidisciplinary approachTropical diseaseProduct (mathematics)MedicineHealth careDiseasePolitical sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A first and critical step to address the research and development gap for Chagas disease is to establish a consensus on the desirable product profiles in different conditions of use. To foster and inform the development of these much needed tools, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), in collaboration with DNDi, Médecins sans Frontières (MSF), and the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR), convened a multidisciplinary group of experts in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (April 2010), to review the evidence and initiate discussions. The meeting established the basis for the development of target product profiles (TPPs), which are reported in this paper.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.013

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations91
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS neglected tropical diseasesSame topicTrypanosoma species research and implicationsFrench-language works237,207