Prion disease risk uncertainties associated with urine-derived and recombinant fertility drugs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The detection of prion protein in widely used urine-derived fertility drugs has raised the possibility that prions from urine donors with (asymptomatic) prion disease could be present in these drugs. A high level of uncertainty exists regarding this issue. An international expert panel provided judgments related to prion disease transmission through fertility drug use in a structured expert elicitation. The elicitation gauged expert judgements about the uncertainty surrounding potential prion disease risks associated with urine-derived fertility drugs and emphasised the scientific ambiguity surrounding disease transmission risk factors associated with urine-derived fertility drugs. Group aggregated responses indicate that the theoretical risk of prion disease transmission with urine-derived fertility drugs was judged to be very low. The experts judged recombinant fertility drugs produced with bovine serum to possess 10-fold lower risk compared to urine-derived fertility drugs. Fertility drugs made without fetal bovine serum were judged to present a risk approximately 1,200 times lower compared to urine-derived counterparts. This elicitation indicates recombinant fertility drugs carry relatively less risk than urine-derived fertility drugs. However, the associated uncertainties are significant and pro-active surveillance of possible new routes of transmission of human prion disease warrants consideration of new scientific data as it becomes available.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".