MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806977278 · doi:10.1016/j.ijpharm.2018.06.018

Promising nanotherapy in treating leishmaniasis

2018· review· en· W2806977278 on OpenAlexaff
Débora Soares Souza Marins, Samir Leite Mathias, Lis Marie Monteiro, Megumi Nishitani Yukuyama, Cauê Benito Scarim, Raimar Löbenberg, Nádia Araci Bou‐Chacra

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Pharmaceutics · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsLeishmaniasisVisceral leishmaniasisDrugMedicineLeishmaniaBone marrowPharmacologyImmunologyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leishmaniases are infectious diseases caused by an intracellular protozoan in humans by 20 different species of Leishmania among more than 53 species. There are at least twelve million cases of infections worldwide and three hundred and fifty million people are at risk in at least 98 developing countries in Africa, South-East Asia, and the Americas. Only Brazil presented high burden for both visceral leishmaniasis (VL) and cutaneous (CL). Chemotherapy is the main means of dealing with this infection. Nevertheless, only a few effective drugs are available, and each has a particular disadvantage; toxicity and long-term regimens compromise most chemotherapeutic options, which decreases patient compliance and adherence to the treatment and consequently the emergence of drug-resistant strains. Nano drug delivery systems (NanoDDS) can direct antileishmanial drug substances for intracellular localization in macrophage-rich organs such as bone marrow, liver, and spleen. This strategy can improve the therapeutic efficacy and reduce the toxic effects of several antileishmanial drug substances. This review is an effort to comprehensively compile recent findings, with the aim of advancing understanding of the importance of nanotechnology for treating leishmaniases.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations91
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of PharmaceuticsSame topicResearch on Leishmaniasis StudiesFrench-language works237,207