MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026269177 · doi:10.1002/jmv.10229

Detection of human herpes virus type 6 DNA in precancerous lesions of the uterine cervix

2002· article· en· W2026269177 on OpenAlexafffund
Danh Tran‐Thanh, Anita Koushik, Diane Provencher, Pierre Drouin, Josée Dubuc‐Lissoir, Philippe Gauthier, Guy Allaire, Janet R. Kornegay, Eduardo L. Franco, François Coutlée

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Virology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNational Cancer InstituteMedical Research Council Canada
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioCervixCervical cancerGenotypeGynecologyCervical intraepithelial neoplasiaHerpes GenitalisCancerInternal medicineVirologyVirusHerpes simplex virusBiologyGeneGenital herpesGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human herpes virus type 6 (HHV-6) DNA has been suggested to be a cofactor to human papillomavirus (HPV) in cervical cancer. In a cross-sectional study, we investigated the association between HHV-6 DNA detected in cervical brushings and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL), while controlling for genital infection with 27 genotypes of HPV. Of the 320 women recruited from an oncologic gynecology clinic, 50 had invasive cervical cancer, 65 had HSIL, 80 had low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL), and 125 were normal. Four of the seven HHV-6-positive women had HSIL. HHV-6 was associated with HSIL after adjusting for age and socioeconomic status (odds ratio [OR] of 10.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-107.1). This association was no longer significant after controlling for HPV (OR = 6.4, 95% CI = 0.3-128.5). HHV-6 was detected in cervical samples from women with precancerous and cancerous lesions of the cervix, but not significantly more frequently than in normal women.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical VirologySame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207