Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The occurrences of transmission of rabies virus by organ and vascular conduit transplantation, and recovery from rabies by a patient in Wisconsin, will be addressed. Perspectives will be given on the prevention of rabies by organ transplantation and on the management of patients with rabies. RECENT FINDINGS: In 2004 transplantation of organs and a vascular conduit was responsible for the transmission of rabies virus, resulting in seven fatal cases of rabies in the USA and Germany. Likely infectious rabies virus was present within nerves of the transplanted organs and arterial segment and productive infection developed in the immunosuppressed recipients. In 2004 a young patient, who did not receive postexposure rabies prophylaxis after a bat bite, survived rabies in Wisconsin. The importance of therapy she received on her favorable outcome remains unknown. SUMMARY: Recent transmissions of rabies virus from organ-transplantation donors highlight the importance of clinical recognition of rabies. Laboratory screening of potential donors for rabies prior to organ transplantation would be associated with logistical problems and serious consequences due to false-positive results. The survival of a patient with rabies has offered hope that effective therapy of rabies may become a reality in the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".