MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2248042103 · doi:10.1093/cid/civ608

Translating the Tuberculosis Research Agenda: Much Accomplished, but Much More to Be Done: Figure 1.

2015· article· en· W2248042103 on OpenAlexaff
Marco Schito, Markus Maeurer, Peter Kim, Debra Hanna, Alimuddin Zumla

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsTuberculosisMedicineMycobacterium tuberculosisTranslational researchIntensive care medicineDrug developmentDiseasePublic healthDrugPharmacologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the availability of effective diagnostics and curative treatment regimens for tuberculosis, millions of people die each year of this disease. The steady global increase in the number of tuberculosis cases caused by multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis are of major concern, especially in light of the thin tuberculosis drug pipeline. New tuberculosis drugs are undergoing clinical evaluation, and renewed hope comes from fresh approaches to improve treatment outcomes using a range of adjunct host-directed cellular and repurposed drug therapies. Current efforts in developing second-generation and new rapid point-of-care diagnostic assays take advantage of recent genetic and molecular advances. Slow progress in the development of prophylactic and therapeutic vaccines requires increased funding for basic as well as translational research. Although major challenges remain, these can be overcome by cementing our resolve, raising advocacy, bolstering global funder investments, and leveraging more effective collaborations through equitable public-private partnerships.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0170.020
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0160.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0610.046

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 head0.309
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207