<scp>SARS‐CoV</scp>‐2 viral dynamic modeling to inform model selection and timing and efficacy of antiviral therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mathematical models of viral dynamics have been reported to describe adequately the dynamic changes of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 viral load within an individual host. In this study, eight published viral dynamic models were assessed, and model selection was performed. Viral load data were collected from a community surveillance study, including 2155 measurements from 162 patients (124 household and 38 non-household contacts). An extended version of the target-cell limited model that includes an eclipse phase and an immune response component that enhances viral clearance described best the data. In general, the parameter estimates showed good precision (relative standard error <10), apart from the death rate of infected cells. The parameter estimates were used to simulate the outcomes of a clinical trial of the antiviral tixagevimab-cilgavimab, a monoclonal antibody combination which blocks infection of the target cells by neutralizing the virus. The simulated outcome of the effectiveness of the antiviral therapy in controlling viral replication was in a good agreement with the clinical trial data. Early treatment with high antiviral efficacy is important for desired therapeutic outcome.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".