MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Practical considerations for a TB controlled human infection model (TB-CHIM); the case for TB-CHIM in Africa, a systematic review of the literature and report of 2 workshop discussions in UK and Malawi

2023· review· en· W4380355039 on OpenAlex
Stephen B. Gordon, Simon Sichone, Anthony Chirwa, Phoebe Hazenberg, Zacharia Kafuko, Daniela M. Ferreira, JoAnne L. Flynn, Sarah M. Fortune, Shobana Balasingam, Giancarlo A. Biagini, Helen McShane, Henry C. Mwandumba, Kondwani Jambo, Keertan Dheda, Nimisha Raj Sharma, Brian D. Robertson, Naomi F. Walker, Ben Morton

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWellcome Open Research · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune responses and vaccinations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineSystematic reviewCINAHLMEDLINEPsychological interventionPsychiatryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<ns5:p> <ns5:bold>Background:</ns5:bold> Tuberculosis (TB) remains a major challenge in many domains including diagnosis, pathogenesis, prevention, treatment, drug resistance and long-term protection of the public health by vaccination. A controlled human infection model (CHIM) could potentially facilitate breakthroughs in each of these domains but has so far been considered impossible owing to technical and safety concerns. </ns5:p> <ns5:p> <ns5:bold>Methods:</ns5:bold> A systematic review of mycobacterial human challenge studies was carried out to evaluate progress to date, best possible ways forward and challenges to be overcome. We searched MEDLINE (1946 to current) and CINAHL (1984 to current) databases; and Google Scholar to search citations in selected manuscripts. The final search was conducted 3 <ns5:sup>rd</ns5:sup> February 2022. Inclusion criteria: adults ≥18 years old; administration of live mycobacteria; and interventional trials or cohort studies with immune and/or microbiological endpoints. Exclusion criteria: animal studies; studies with no primary data; no administration of live mycobacteria; retrospective cohort studies; case-series; and case-reports. Relevant tools (Cochrane Collaboration for RCTs and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-randomised studies) were used to assess risk of bias and present a narrative synthesis of our findings. </ns5:p> <ns5:p> <ns5:bold>Results:</ns5:bold> The search identified 1,388 titles for review; of these 90 were reviewed for inclusion; and 27 were included. Of these, 15 were randomised controlled trials and 12 were prospective cohort studies. We focussed on administration route, challenge agent and dose administered for data extraction. Overall, BCG studies including fluorescent BCG show the most immediate utility, and genetically modified <ns5:italic>Mycobacteria tuberculosis</ns5:italic> is the most tantalising prospect of discovery breakthrough. </ns5:p> <ns5:p> <ns5:bold>Conclusions:</ns5:bold> The TB-CHIM development group met in 2019 and 2022 to consider the results of the systematic review, to hear presentations from many of the senior authors whose work had been reviewed and to consider best ways forward. This paper reports both the systematic review and the deliberations. </ns5:p> <ns5:p> <ns5:bold>Registration:</ns5:bold> PROSPERO ( <ns5:ext-link xmlns:ns6="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" ns6:href="https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022302785">CRD42022302785</ns5:ext-link> ; 21 January 2022). </ns5:p>

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.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.209 · 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