MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339806333 · doi:10.1128/mbio.00456-16

A Step Toward Eradication of Human Filariases in Areas Where <i>Loa</i> Is Endemic

2016· article· en· W2339806333 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy G. Geary

Bibliographic record

VenuemBio · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParasitic Diseases Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoa loaMicrofilariaLymphatic filariasisFilariasisOnchocerciasisMass drug administrationDiethylcarbamazineWuchereria bancroftiMedicineTransmission (telecommunications)ImmunologyIncidence (geometry)IvermectinBiologyVeterinary medicineEnvironmental healthHelminthsPopulationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mass drug administration (MDA) programs have achieved remarkable success in limiting the pathology and transmission of the human parasitic infections onchocerciasis and lymphatic filariasis. The full implementation of MDA campaigns for filariasis elimination has been stymied by the unacceptable incidence of severe adverse events observed following drug treatment of a subset of individuals who harbor high loads of Loa loa microfilaria. Extending MDA strategies to regions where loiasis is coendemic could be done confidently if a simple, inexpensive, and rapid diagnostic method was available that could accurately identify individuals who have L. loa microfilarial loads above the risk threshold and could thus be excluded from treatment. A recent paper in mBio reports the discovery of an antigen unique to L. loa microfilaria that can be detected in blood and urine and may form the basis for such an assay. Further work will reveal whether this discovery will smooth the path to achieve filariasis eradication.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemBioSame topicParasitic Diseases Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207