MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092583924 · doi:10.1016/s2666-5247(20)30145-2

Mycobacterium orygis: a zoonosis, zooanthroponosis, or both? – Authors' reply

2020· letter· en· W3092583924 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shannon C. Duffy, Sreenidhi Srinivasan, Joy S. Michael, Marcel A. Behr, Vivek Kapur

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Microbe · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsZoonosisTransmission (telecommunications)Mycobacterium bovisTuberculosisBiologyMycobacterium tuberculosis complexLivestockWildlifeMycobacterium tuberculosisZoologyGeographyVirologyEcologyMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We thank Sven David Charles Parsons for highlighting the many unknowns concerning zoonotic tuberculosis and Mycobacterium orygis. We concur with the assessment that the evidence from the literature, including our Article,1 precludes a definitive understanding of whether M orygis is a marker of zoonosis, zooanthoponosis, or both. Whether cattle or humans (or other species, such as oryxes) serve as reservoir hosts for M orygis is unknown, highlighting the need for genomic epidemiological investigations to refine our understanding of the transmission dynamics of this pathogen.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.008
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0260.034
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet MicrobeSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207