MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028087573 · doi:10.1002/cyto.10097

T‐cell subset counting and the fight against AIDS: Reflections over a 20‐year struggle

2002· review· en· W2028087573 on OpenAlexaff
Francis Mandy, J.K.A. Nicholson, Brigitte Autran, George Janossy

Bibliographic record

VenueCytometry · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsStatistics CanadaHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunophenotypingEnumerationComputer scienceFlow cytometryImmunologyBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The story of T-lymphocyte subset immunophenotyping technology is reviewed on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of CD4 T-cell enumeration. Over time, immunophenotyping has evolved into precise, reliable, but complicated and expensive technology requiring fresh blood samples. The gating technologies that were universally adapted for clinical flow cytometry for the past decade relied on rapidly deteriorating morphological scatter characteristics of leukocytes. This special issue dedicated to CD4 T-cell enumeration features most of the available new options that will have a significant impact on how this technology will be implemented within the first decade of the 21st century. In a series of original publications, including the new NIH guideline for T-cell subset enumeration, contemporary gating protocols that use immunologically logical parameters are presented as part of the more reliable and affordable immunophenotyping alternative. Some of the improvements addressed here include the costs of the assays and the capacity to monitor interlaboratory and intralaboratory performances. It is clear that an effective attack on the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic has to embrace resource-poor regions. Reducing the cost of the assay while improving reliability and durability is a move in the right direction.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations49
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCytometrySame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207