MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209396846 · doi:10.1093/jme/tjab135

Resurgence of Interest in Eastern Equine Encephalitis Virus Vaccine Development

2021· review· en· W3209396846 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ann M. Powers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Entomology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsOutbreakAlphavirusVirologyBiologyTogaviridaeVirusVector (molecular biology)EncephalitisViral encephalitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV; Family Togaviridae), is an endemic pathogen first isolated in 1933 with distribution primarily in the eastern US and Canada. The virus has caused periodic outbreaks in both humans and equines along the eastern seaboard and through the southern coastal states. While the outbreaks caused by EEEV have been sporadic and varied geographically since the discovery of the virus, it has continued to expand its range moving into the Midwest states as well. Additionally, one of the largest outbreaks was recorded in 2019 prompting concerns that outbreaks were becoming larger and more frequent. Because the virus can cause serious disease and because it is transmissible by both mosquitoes and aerosol, there has been renewed interest in identifying potential options for vaccines. Currently, there are no licensed vaccines and control relies completely on the use of personal protective measures and integrated vector control which have limited effectiveness for the EEEV vectors. Several vaccine candidates are currently being developed; this review will describe the multiple options under consideration for future development and assess their relative advantages and disadvantages.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical EntomologySame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207