Dengue vaccine trial guidelines and role of large-scale, post proof-of-concept demonstration projects in bringing a dengue vaccine to use in dengue endemic areas
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this review, we consider the issues impacting conduct and design of dengue vaccine trials with reference to the recently published World Health Organization "Guidelines for Conduct of Clinical Trials of Dengue Vaccines in Endemic Areas." We discuss logistic, scientific and ethical challenges concerning evaluation and introduction of dengue vaccines; these range from randomized trials that establish "proof of concept" of vaccine efficacy, to post-"proof of concept" trials, particularly demonstration projects likely to be required for licensure or for the introduction of an already licensed vaccine into public use. We clarify and define the meaning of "proof of concept" in the clinical trial context and the meaning of terms "phase 2b", "phase 3b" and "demonstration project", which are commonly used but have not been defined well in the clinical literature.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it