MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2904299237 · doi:10.18192/uojm.v8i2.3651

Gene Therapy: A Promising Therapeutic Strategy for Malaria

2018· article· en· W2904299237 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Raafay Shehzad

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalariaCRISPRCas9Genome editingGene driveGenetic enhancementMedicineDiseaseVector (molecular biology)Viral vectorBiologyBioinformaticsComputational biologyImmunologyGeneGeneticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malaria is a serious illness caused by the Plasmodium parasite, which places approximately 3.5 billion people at risk. Currently, preventative measures are key in combatting this disease. However, gene therapy is an emerging field that shows promising results for the treatment of malaria, by modifying cells through the delivery of genetic material. Most notable was the discovery of CRISPR-Cas9, which not only allows deleterious mutations to be repaired, but does so with specificity, speed, and simplicity. There are numerous ongoing trials focusing on gene therapy in malaria treatment and prevention. They involve different approaches such as the genetic modification of vector mosquitoes to interfere with malaria transmission, use of CRISPR-Cas9, maternal-effect dominant embryonic arrest, homing endonuclease gene drive systems, and the design of specific Morpholino oligomers to interfere with the expression of parasitic characteristics. Overall, this emerging field shows promising results to treat and prevent not just malaria, but other diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and obesity.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of Medicine→Same topicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering→French-language works237,207→