Immunostimulatory properties of a novel adjuvant administered with inactivated influenza virus vaccine
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The immunopotentiating activity of a new delivery system was investigated comparatively to Alhydrogel adjuvant, as an antiviral inactivated vaccine after one injection. The efficiency of the new formulation (BioMed) was evaluated with an inactivated porcine strain of influenza (A/Sw/IN/1726/88 H1N1) in the pig model. The first assessment criteria was the follow-up of selected immunological parameters such as, antibody levels, lymphoproliferation, double positive CD4+CD8+ T lymphocytes and cytokine production (IL-2, IL-4, IFN-gamma). The second criteria was the estimate of the protection level of animals exposed to a homologous challenge of 50 PID50 one month after a single immunizing or control injection. In the BioMed group of animals, 4 pigs (out of 6) were free of macroscopic lesion, while lesions could be seen in all individuals of other groups and virus was isolated in only one animal, whereas all other animals of other groups had virus in their lungs. This better protection of BioMed animals seems to be correlated mainly with higher levels of antibodies and to a lesser extent with a slightly better CMI response and probably with the production of memory CD4+CD8+ T cells.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it