MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983813529 · doi:10.1002/bdrb.10035

Species comparison of anatomical and functional immune system development

2003· review· en· W1983813529 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBirth Defects Research Part B Developmental and Reproductive Toxicology · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotoxicology and immune responses
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmune systemBiologyDrug developmentImmunotoxicologyNeuroscienceImmunologyDrugPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The components of the immune system have not been traditionally emphasized as potential target organs in standard developmental and reproductive toxicity (DART) protocols. A number of workshops have been organized in recent years to examine scientific questions that underlie developmental immunotoxicity tests, and the interpretation of results as they relate to human risk assessment. A key question that must be addressed is to determine the most appropriate species and strains to model the developing human immune system. The objective of this review is to compare the anatomical and functional development of the immune system in several species important to either preclinical studies for drug development or safety assessments for chemicals, with what is known in humans. The development of the immune system in humans will be compared to what is known in mice, rats, dogs and nonhuman primates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.228 · 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