MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888252012 · doi:10.1111/cmi.12944

Masters of manipulation: Viral modulation of the immunological synapse

2018· review· en· W2888252012 on OpenAlexafffund
Rebecca Bayliss, Vincent Piguet

Bibliographic record

VenueCellular Microbiology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus research
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of TorontoWellcome Trust
KeywordsBiologyImmunological synapseVirusImmune systemVirologyViral replicationSynapseViral entryCell biologyT cellImmunologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to thrive, viruses have evolved to manipulate host cell machinery for their own benefit. One major obstacle faced by pathogens is the immunological synapse. To enable efficient replication and latency in immune cells, viruses have developed a range of strategies to manipulate cellular processes involved in immunological synapse formation to evade immune detection and control T-cell activation. In vitro, viruses such as human immunodeficiency virus 1 and human T-lymphotropic virus type 1 utilise structures known as virological synapses to aid transmission of viral particles from cell to cell in a process termed trans-infection. The formation of the virological synapse provides a gateway for virus to be transferred between cells avoiding the extracellular space, preventing antibody neutralisation or recognition by complement. This review looks at how viruses are able to subvert intracellular signalling to modulate immune function to their advantage and explores the role synapse formation has in viral persistence and cell-to-cell transmission.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCellular MicrobiologySame topicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus researchFrench-language works237,207