MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982273635 · doi:10.4161/viru.24318

Modulation of the enterohemorrhagic<i>E. coli</i>virulence program through the human gastrointestinal tract

2013· review· en· W1982273635 on OpenAlexaff
Debora Barnett Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueVirulence · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEscherichia coli research studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirulenceBiologyGastrointestinal tractPathogenMicrobiologyHost (biology)Virulence factorHuman pathogenEscherichia coliHuman gastrointestinal tractEnteric virusBacteriaGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enteric pathogens must not only survive passage through the gastrointestinal tract but must also coordinate expression of virulence determinants in response to localized microenvironments with the host. Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC), a serious food and waterborne human pathogen, is well equipped with an arsenal of molecular factors that allows it to survive passage through the gastrointestinal tract and successfully colonize the large intestine. This review will explore how EHEC responds to various environmental cues associated with particular microenvironments within the host and how it employs these cues to modulate virulence factor expression, with a view to developing a conceptual framework for understanding modulation of EHEC's virulence program in response to the host. In vitro studies offer significant insights into the role of individual environmental cues but in vivo studies using animal models as well as data from natural infections will ultimately provide a more comprehensive picture of the highly regulated virulence program of this pathogen.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations67
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirulenceSame topicEscherichia coli research studiesFrench-language works237,207