Urate Transporters: Transforming the Face of Hyperuricemia and Gout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent outbreak of 2019-nCoV in Wuhan raised serious public health concerns. By February 15, 2020 in Wuhan, the total number of confirmed infection cases has reached 37,914, and the number of deaths has reached 1123, accounting for 56.9% of the total confirmed cases and 73.7% of the total deaths in China. People are eager to know when the epidemic will be completely controlled and when people’s work and life will be on the right track. In this study we analyzed the epidemic dynamics and trend of 2019-nCoV in Wuhan by using the data after the closure of Wuhan city till February 12, 2020 based on the SEIR modeling method. The optimal parameters were estimated as R0=1.44 (interquartile range: 1.40-1.47),TI=14 (interquartile range: 14-14) and TE=3.0 (interquartile range: 2.8-3.1). Based on these parameters, the number of infected individuals in Wuhan city may reach the peak around February 19 at about 45,000 people. Once entering March, the epidemic would gradually decline, and end around the late March. It is worth noting that the above prediction is based on the assumption that the number of susceptible population N = 200,000 will not increase. If the epidemic situation is not properly controlled, the peak of infected number can be further increased and the peak time will be a little postponed. It was expected that the epidemic would subside in early March, and disappear gradually towards the late March.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".