MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110933237 · doi:10.1086/313687

Prospects for Control of Herpes Simplex Virus Disease through Immunization

2000· review· en· W2110933237 on OpenAlexaff
Lawrence R. Stanberry, Anthony L. Cunningham, Adrian Mindel, Lesley Scott, S L Spruance, F. Y. Aoki, Charles Lacey

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsMedicineHerpes simplex virusDiseaseImmunologyImmunizationVirologyMucocutaneous zoneRegimenVirusImmune systemInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Herpes simplex viruses (HSVs) can cause a variety of infections, including genital herpes. Despite effective antiviral therapy, HSV infections remain a significant worldwide public health problem. Vaccines offer the best hope for controlling spread and limiting HSV disease. This article discusses the pathogenesis and immunobiology of mucocutaneous HSV infections, summarizes the spectrum of diseases caused by HSV, and provides a review of the field of HSV vaccine research. This article also discusses what might be realistically expected of a vaccine intended for control of genital herpes and explores the question of whether a vaccine that is effective in controlling genital HSV disease might also be effective in controlling nongenital HSV disease. The efficacy of such vaccines for the full spectrum of HSV disease will eventually determine the timing and targeting of immunization, ranging from selective immunization in preadolescence to universal childhood immunization as part of the routine childhood regimen.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.007

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.363 · 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

Citations199
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207