MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2752536539 · doi:10.1186/s12981-017-0166-7

Preventing HIV infection without targeting the virus: how reducing HIV target cells at the genital tract is a new approach to HIV prevention

2017· review· en· W2752536539 on OpenAlexafffund
Julie Lajoie, Lucy Wangari Mwangi, Keith R. Fowke

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Research and Therapy · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGrand Challenges Canada
KeywordsMedicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Genital tractVirologyImmunologyVirusMale circumcisionPhysiologyHealth servicesPopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For over three decades, HIV infection has had a tremendous impact on the lives of individuals and public health. Microbicides and vaccines studies have shown that immune activation at the genital tract is a risk factor for HIV infection. Furthermore, lower level of immune activation, or what we call immune quiescence, has been associated with a lower risk of HIV acquisition. This unique phenotype is observed in highly-exposed seronegative individuals from different populations including female sex workers from the Pumwani cohort in Nairobi, Kenya. Here, we review the link between immune activation and susceptibility to HIV infection. We also describe a new concept in prevention where, instead of targeting the virus, we modulate the host immune system to resist HIV infection. Mimicking the immune quiescence phenotype might become a new strategy in the toolbox of biomedical methods to prevent HIV infection. Clinical trial registration on clinicaltrial.gov: #NCT02079077.

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: Not applicable · 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
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIDS Research and TherapySame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207