Bibliographic record
Abstract
Benzimidazole (BZ) resistance is widespread and appears to be readily selected in a variety of nematode parasites of animals. There have been reports of a lack of efficacy of BZ anthelmintics against soil transmitted nematode parasites of humans. However, resistance to BZs in nematodes of humans has not been confirmed. It is difficult to perform tests to confirm anthelmintic resistance in humans for a variety of technical and ethical reasons. The use of anthelmintic drugs for the control of helminth parasites in people is increasing massively as a result of numerous programmes to control gastrointestinal nematode parasites in children, the Global Program for the Elimination of Lymphatic Filariasis and other programmes. Many of these programmes are dependent on BZ anthelmintics and this will increase the pressure for resistance development to BZ anthelmintics in nematode parasites of people. We need to perform monitoring for anthelmintic resistance in these programmes and we need new tools to make that monitoring sensitive, inexpensive and practical. There is a real need for DNA-based markers for BZ resistance in nematode parasites of humans. We have a reasonable understanding of the molecular mechanisms and genetics of BZ resistance in some nematode parasites of animals and similar mechanisms are likely to prevail in nematodes of humans. Based on the likelihood that similar single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) will be involved in BZ resistance in human, as in animal nematode parasites, rapid SNP assays have been developed for possible BZ resistance development in Wuchereria bancrofti.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".