MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111191097 · doi:10.4269/ajtmh.12-0484

Molecular and Biological Diagnostic Tests for Monitoring Benzimidazole Resistance in Human Soil-Transmitted Helminths

2013· article· en· W2111191097 on OpenAlexaff
Aïssatou Diawara, Jan M. Schwenkenbecher, Ray M. Kaplan, Roger K. Prichard

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasites and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenzimidazoleHelminthsHelminthiasisBiologyResistance (ecology)ImmunologyEcologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In endemic countries with soil-transmitted helminths mass drug administration with albendazole or mebendazole are being implemented as a control strategy. However, it is well known in veterinary helminths that the use of the same benzimidazole drugs can place selection on the β-tubulin gene, leading to resistance. Given the concern that resistance could arise in human soil-transmitted helminths, there is an urgent need to develop accurate diagnostic tools for monitoring resistance. In this study, we developed molecular assays to detect putative resistance genetic changes in Ascaris lumbricoides, Trichuris trichiura, and hookworms, and we optimized an egg hatch assay for the canine hookworm Ancylostoma caninum and applied it to Necator americanus. Both assays were tested on field samples. The molecular assays demonstrated their reproducibility and capacity to detect the presence of worms carrying putative resistance-associated genetic changes. However, further investigations are needed to validate our molecular and biological tests on additional field isolates.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 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

Citations85
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Tropical Medicine and HygieneSame topicParasites and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207