MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413609224 · doi:10.1080/08898480.2013.836427

A mathematical model of a theoretical sleeping sickness vaccine

2016· article· en· W2413609224 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Population Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrypanosoma species research and implications
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaccinationBasic reproduction numberTransmissibility (structural dynamics)PopulationVaccine efficacyBiologyEnvironmental healthDemographyMedicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human African sleeping sickness is found throughout sub-Saharan Africa. It affects up to 70, 000 individuals per year, primarily the poor. Existing treatments are limited, costly, and often toxic. Recent evidence suggests that a vaccine may be viable. Potential vaccines against Rhodesian sleeping sickness may be imperfect, may only be delivered to some proportion of the population, may wane over time, and may not always mount an immunogenic response in the individual receiving it. The potential effects of such a vaccine are addressed and compared to vector control. The basic reproductive ratio for both unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals is derived. The fitness ratio is used to show that vaccines that grant longer life must be accompanied by a corresponding reduction in transmissibility. A sensitivity analysis shows that control of tsetse flies through insecticide is superior to an idealized vaccine. Such a vaccine is unlikely to eradicate the disease, even if delivered to 100% of the population. Consequently, efforts to control sleeping sickness that do not incorporate vector control may be flawed.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.301 · 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