MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233468253 · doi:10.1139/w01-004

IgA and IgM anti-<i>Naegleria fowleri</i>antibodies in human serum and saliva

2001· article· en· W4233468253 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Víctor Rivera, Saúl Rojas, Gabriela Oliver, Jesús Serrano, Mineko Shibayama, Vı́ctor Tsutsumi, Rafael K. Campos

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLegionella and Acanthamoeba research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
KeywordsSalivaNaegleria fowleriAntibodyNaegleriaImmunologyTiterBiologyParasite hostingMicrobiologyAntibody titerVirologyProtozoaMeningoencephalitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antibodies from IgA and IgM classes that recognize Naegleria fowleri (Nf) proteins were detected by the ELISA assay in serum and saliva from three groups of people: (i) subjects with upper respiratory tract infections (URTI) living in the parasite-endemic area, (ii) healthy persons from the same area, and (iii) healthy persons from a parasite-nonendemic area. In serum and in saliva the titers of IgA antibodies to Naegleria fowleri in the group of patients with URTI was significantly higher than that of the healthy group in the parasite-endemic area; also the titers of IgM antibodies in serum were significantly higher in patients. On the contrary, in saliva the antibodies were higher in healthy people from the parasite-endemic area. In all cases the subjects from the parasite-nonendemic area had lower antibody titers in serum and saliva.Key words: Naegleria fowleri, IgA, IgM antibodies, serum, saliva.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.250
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicLegionella and Acanthamoeba researchFrench-language works237,207