MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989101661 · doi:10.4061/2011/816250

<i>Plasmodium falciparum</i>: Assessment of Selectivity of Action of Chloroquine, <i>Alchornea cordifolia</i>, <i>Ficus polita</i>, and Other Drugs by a Tetrazolium-Based Colorimetric Assay

2011· article· en· W1989101661 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nana K. Ayisi, Regina Appiah‐Opong, Ben Gyan, Kwasi Agyei Bugyei, F.A. Ekuban

Bibliographic record

VenueMalaria Research and Treatment · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMalaria Research and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNoguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research, University of GhanaCenters for Disease Control and PreventionUniversity of GhanaYork University
KeywordsAlgorithmChemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A tetrazolium-based colorimetric selective assay (MTT-based CSA) was developed to assess the selectivity of antimalarial drugs. This in vitro assay, unlike all others, measures the ability of drugs to indirectly protect red blood cells (RBCs) from Plasmodium-falciparum-induced destruction. Optimum incubation time and number of cells needed were 5 days and 23 × 10(6) RBCs per well, respectively. A parasitemia range of 0.375% to 3% was found to be suitable for this assay. The MTT-based CSA determined anti-P. falciparum strain DD2 activity of chloroquine at a higher 50% effective concentration (EC(50)) value (21.0 μg/mL) than the isotopic microtest (10.0 μg/mL). Artesunate and oxytetracycline achieved 90% effect against DD2 with minimal or no toxicity to RBCs. Against chloroquine sensitive strain 3D7, chloroquine and Alchornea cordifolia had EC(50) values of 0.025 μg/mL and 4.9 μg/mL respectively, and selective index (SI) values of >2,000 and >69.4 μg/mL, respectively.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMalaria Research and TreatmentSame topicMalaria Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207