MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016032432 · doi:10.1186/s12979-020-00180-2

Can an effective SARS-CoV-2 vaccine be developed for the older population?

2020· editorial· en· W3016032432 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

VenueImmunity & Ageing · 2020
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Medicine2019-20 coronavirus outbreakVirologySars virusPandemicPopulationEnvironmental healthInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and its inordinately rapid spread is posing severe challenges to the wellbeing of millions of people worldwide, health care systems and the global economy. While many younger people experience no or mild symptoms on infection, older adults are highly susceptible to life-threatening respiratory and systemic conditions which demand a full understanding and leveraging of knowledge of the differences between immunity in young and old people. Consequently, we welcome papers addressing any issues relevant to immunity and ageing in the context of SARS-CoV-2, and will endeavour to fast-track peer-review. We aim to provide a platform exclusively for discussions of individual and age differences in susceptibility and immune responses to COVID caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection and how to prevent or reduce severity of disease in older adults.

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)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.340 · 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