MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285891038 · doi:10.1016/j.xpro.2022.101575

An in vivo biosafety-level-2-compatible model of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection for drug susceptibility testing

2022· article· en· W4285891038 on OpenAlexafffund
Yi Chu Liang, Stefania Berton, Courtney Reeks, Jim Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueSTAR Protocols · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and ImmunityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchLung Health FoundationNational Sanitarium Association
KeywordsMycobacterium tuberculosisVirulenceTuberculosisRifampicinMicrobiologyVirologyBiologyIsoniazidAntibioticsMedicineGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Available mouse models for tuberculosis drug susceptibility testing requires using virulent biosafety-level-3 (BSL-3) Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) strains, or attenuated BSL-2 strains that lack virulence genes. Here, we present a BSL-2-compatible mouse model for tuberculosis drug susceptibility testing using the auxotrophic Mtb mc26206 strain, which retains all virulence genes. Using rifampicin and a new autophagy-boosting compound, SMIP-30, we provide a step-by-step guide for the infection, drug administration, and evaluation of Mtb burden and cytokine profiles. This protocol is easily adaptable for testing of other antibiotics and host-directed compounds. For complete details on the use and execution of this protocol, please refer to Berton et al. (2022).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.006

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSTAR ProtocolsSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207