MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158105592 · doi:10.1186/1423-0127-20-37

Current progress in dengue vaccines

2013· review· en· W2158105592 on OpenAlexaff
Shu-Wen Wan, Chiou‐Feng Lin, Shuying Wang, Yu‐Hung Chen, Trai‐Ming Yeh, Hsiao‐Sheng Liu, Robert Anderson, Yee-Shin Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Science · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Science Council
KeywordsDengue feverDengue vaccineDengue virusVirologyMedicineDNA vaccinationAntibody-dependent enhancementVirusAttenuated vaccineImmunologyAntibodyBiologyImmunizationVirulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dengue is one of the most important emerging vector-borne viral diseases. There are four serotypes of dengue viruses (DENV), each of which is capable of causing self-limited dengue fever (DF) or even life-threatening dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF) and dengue shock syndrome (DSS). The major clinical manifestations of severe DENV disease are vascular leakage, thrombocytopenia, and hemorrhage, yet the detailed mechanisms are not fully resolved. Besides the direct effects of the virus, immunopathological aspects are also involved in the development of dengue symptoms. Although no licensed dengue vaccine is yet available, several vaccine candidates are under development, including live attenuated virus vaccines, live chimeric virus vaccines, inactivated virus vaccines, and live recombinant, DNA and subunit vaccines. The live attenuated virus vaccines and live chimeric virus vaccines are undergoing clinical evaluation. The other vaccine candidates have been evaluated in preclinical animal models or are being prepared for clinical trials. For the safety and efficacy of dengue vaccines, the immunopathogenic complications such as antibody-mediated enhancement and autoimmunity of dengue disease need to 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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.376 · 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

Citations71
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical ScienceSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207