MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973054581 · doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a037069

Hepatitis C Virus: 30 Years after Its Discovery

2019· review· en· W2973054581 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunoscreeningVirologyHepatitis C virusInterferonMedicineHepatitisHepatitis CDrug discoveryVirusBiologyImmunologyBioinformaticsComplementary DNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evidence for the existence of another hepatitis-causing pathogen, other than the known hepatitis A and B viruses, emerged in the mid-1970s. A frustrating search of 15 years was ended by the identification of the hepatitis C virus in 1989 using a recombinant DNA immunoscreening method. This discovery quickly led to blood tests that eliminated posttransfusion hepatitis C and could show the partial efficacy of type 1 interferon-based therapies. Subsequent knowledge of the viral replication cycle then led to the development of effective direct-acting antivirals targeting its serine protease, polymerase, and nonstructural protein 5A that resulted in the approval of orally available drug combinations that can cure patients within a few months with few side effects. Meanwhile, vaccine strategies have been shown to be feasible, and they are still required to effectively control this global epidemic.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.314 · 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