MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116227626 · doi:10.1086/655973

Natural Resistance to HIV Infection: Lessons Learned from HIV‐Exposed Uninfected Individuals

2010· article· en· W2116227626 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gianfranco Pancino, Asier Sáez‐Cirión, Daniel Scott‐Algara, Pascale Paul

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSidactionStyrelsen för Internationellt UtvecklingssamarbeteUniversity of ManitobaBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsImmunologyPeripheral blood mononuclear cellBiologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)VirologyInnate immune systemVirusIn vivoViral replicationDrug resistanceLentivirusCellViral diseaseIn vitroImmune systemMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explored potential mechanisms of resistance to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV‐1) infection in different groups of uninfected individuals exposed by systemic or mucosal routes: intravascular drug users in Vietnam and spouses of HIV‐infected individuals in Cambodia and Central African Republic. Our main findings were reduced susceptibility of peripheral blood mononuclear cells to HIV‐1 infection in vitro, associated with low levels of CD4+ T cell activation in vivo and/or cell restriction of viral replication, and enhanced natural killer cell activity, associated with increased ratios of activating to inhibitory natural killer cell receptors. These results support a contribution of innate responses to resistance against HIV‐1 infection. Scientific and ethical issues encountered during research in exposed uninfected subjects must be considered.

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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
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

Citations40
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207