MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000644795 · doi:10.1080/00365540310016042

Neisserial Opa Proteins: Impact on Colonization, Dissemination and Immunity

2003· review· en· W2000644795 on OpenAlexafffund
Scott D. Gray‐Owen

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth Canada
KeywordsBiologyTranscytosisVitronectinNeisseriaCell biologyBacterial adhesinReceptorNeisseria meningitidisMicrobiologyExtracellular matrixFibronectinGeneGeneticsBacteriaVirulenceEndocytosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pathogenic Neisseria sp. encode a family of phase-variable and antigenically distinct Opa proteins that allow bacterial attachment to virtually every cell type encountered during infection. Some Opa variants bind cell surface-expressed heparan sulfate proteoglycans, including members of the syndecan family of receptors, and extracellular matrix proteins such as fibronectin and vitronectin. Other variants bind members of the carcinoembryonic antigen family of cellular adhesion molecules. Depending on the Opa variant(s) expressed, these receptor interactions can allow neisserial entry and transcellular transcytosis across polarized epithelial cell monolayers, entry into endothelial cells, suppression of lymphocyte function and/or bacterial engulfment and killing by neutrophils. Recent advances in our understanding of how these Opa protein-mediated interactions influence the host cellular response are discussed in the context of their impact on various stages of neisserial infection.

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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations41
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207