MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127650449 · doi:10.4161/hv.6.6.11097

Recent advances in<i>Ebolavirus</i>vaccine development

2010· review· en· W2127650449 on OpenAlexaff
Jason S. Richardson, Joseph D. Dekker, Maria A. Croyle, Gary Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Vaccines · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodefenseEbolavirusVirologyCase fatality rateBiologyOutbreakMedicineImmunologyEbola virusPopulationMicrobiologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ebolavirus is a highly infectious pathogen with a case fatality rate as high as 90%. Currently there is a lack of licensed Ebolavirus vaccines as well as pre- and post-exposure treatments. Recent increases in the frequency of natural human Ebolavirus infections and its potential use as a bioterrorism agent makes vaccine development a priority for many nations. Significant progress has been made in understanding the pathogenesis of Ebolavirus infection and several promising vaccine candidates were shown to be successful in protecting NHPs against lethal infection. These include replication-deficient adenovirus vectors, replication-competent VSV, HPIV-3 vectors and virus-like particle preparations. Recent advances in the generation of effective post-exposure immunization strategies highlight the possibility of developing a single dose vaccine that will confer full protection in humans following Ebolavirus exposure. Post-exposure protection is particularly important in outbreak and biodefense settings, as well as clinical and laboratory settings in the case of accidental exposure.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations49
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman VaccinesSame topicViral Infections and Outbreaks ResearchFrench-language works237,207