MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2525605172 · doi:10.1080/21505594.2016.1231278

Aspergillosis and stem cell transplantation: An overview of experimental pathogenesis studies

2016· review· en· W2525605172 on OpenAlexaff
Nadia Al-Bader, Donald C. Sheppard

Bibliographic record

VenueVirulence · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAspergillus fumigatusBiologyAspergillosisImmunologyImmune systemHematopoietic stem cell transplantationTransplantationAspergillusPathogenStem cellHost (biology)MicrobiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Invasive aspergillosis is a life-threatening infection caused by the opportunistic filamentous fungus Aspergillus fumigatus. Patients undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) for the treatment of hematological malignancy are at particularly high risk of developing this fatal infection. The susceptibility of HSCT patients to infection with A. fumigatus is a consequence of a complex interplay of both fungal and host factors. Here we review our understanding of the host-pathogen interactions underlying the susceptibility of the immunocompromised host to infection with A. fumigatus with a focus on the experimental validation of fungal and host factors relevant to HSCT patients. These include fungal factors such as secondary metabolites, cell wall constituents, and metabolic adaptations that facilitate immune evasion and survival within the host microenvironment, as well as the innate and adaptive immune responses involved in host defense against A. fumigatus.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirulenceSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207