MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3146559087 · doi:10.14745/ccdr.v47i03a01f

Vaccin contre le SRAS-CoV-2 : défis et considérations

2021· article· fr· W3146559087 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ruchi Chaube

Bibliographic record

VenueRelevé des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakHumanitiesMedicineVirologyPhilosophyInfectious disease (medical specialty)OutbreakDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Il est essentiel de tenir compte des défis auxquels nous avons déjà été confrontés et auxquels nous avons répondu dans le cadre de la mise au point d’un vaccin contre le coronavirus du syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère 2 (SRAS-CoV-2). Compte tenu de la gravité de la crise sanitaire que le SRAS-CoV-2 a causée à l’échelle mondiale, et compte tenu du fait que nous en savons très peu sur le virus, nous devrions nous concentrer sur des approches qui peuvent améliorer les résultats en matière de développement dans un laps de temps relativement court. Ce commentaire traite de l’utilisation des vaccins à base d’acide nucléique (acide désoxyribonucléique et acide ribonucléique) contre les infections virales et les contextes de pandémie. Les avantages potentiels des vaccins à base d’acide nucléique par rapport aux vaccins conventionnels sont présentés, puis nous discuterons des vaccins à base d’acide nucléique en développement contre les infections virales ainsi que des défis relatifs à ces vaccins au début des essais cliniques.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRelevé des maladies transmissibles au CanadaSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207