MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140709409 · doi:10.1055/s-0028-1085707

New Diagnostics for Latent and Active Tuberculosis: State of the Art and Future Prospects

2008· review· en· W2140709409 on OpenAlexaff
Madhukar Pai, Richard O’Brien

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTuberculosisIntensive care medicineDiagnostic testTuberculinDiseaseSputumHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)PediatricsPathologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tuberculosis (TB) continues to be the world's most important infectious cause of morbidity and mortality among adults. Nearly 9 million people develop TB disease each year, and an estimated 1.6 million die from the disease. Despite this enormous global burden, case detection rates are low, posing serious hurdles for TB control. Conventional TB diagnosis continues to rely on antiquated tests such as sputum smear microscopy, culture, tuberculin skin test, and chest radiography. These tests have several limitations and perform poorly in populations affected by the HIV epidemic. Conventional tests for detection of drug resistance are time consuming, tedious, and inaccessible in most settings. In this review, we describe recent advances in the diagnosis of latent and active TB, and detection of drug resistance. Although the perfect test will not be ready for large-scale roll-out and integration into routine TB care services for some time, substantial progress has been made in expanding the TB diagnostic product pipeline. With the resurgence of interest in the development of new tools for TB control, and the recent influx of funding and political support, it is likely that the next few years will see the introduction of new diagnostic tools into routine TB control programs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations85
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207