MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159317368 · doi:10.20506/rst.21.3.1365

Identification of foot and mouth disease virus carrier and subclinically infected animals and differentiation from vaccinated animals

2002· review· en· W2159317368 on OpenAlexaff
R. Kitching

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Scientifique et Technique de l OIE · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsCanadian Science Centre for Human and Animal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutbreakFoot-and-mouth diseaseSerologyDiseaseVirologyAntibodyVirusVaccinationBiologyMedicineImmunologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Countries that are free of foot and mouth disease (FMD) are reluctant to use vaccine in the event of an outbreak because of the difficulties this can cause in re-establishing freedom from FMD status to the satisfaction of trading partners. The problem does not lie in distinguishing between vaccinated and recovered animals as vaccinated animals can be tagged or otherwise marked to show that they have been vaccinated; the difficulty is in identifying vaccinated animals that have had contact with live virus and become carriers. The traditional probang test is not sufficiently sensitive and is labour- and laboratory-intensive, but alternative serological tests such as those for antibodies to non-structural proteins (NSPs), or specific immunoglobulin A (IgA) are also not 100% sensitive. However, these newer tests do provide increased security by reducing the likelihood of trading carrier animals and can be used to help define the limits of an outbreak; the use of vaccine to help control an outbreak of FMD in a previously free country still has significant consequences on trade in FMD susceptible animals and their products.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 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

Citations88
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue Scientifique et Technique de l OIESame topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207