MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399785794 · doi:10.7717/peerj.17400

The role of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) as an immunological marker for patients with leprosy: a systematic literature review

2024· article· en· W4399785794 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Flora Ramona Sigit Prakoeswa, Ellen Josephine Handoko, Erika Diana Risanti, Nabila Haningtyas, Nasrurrofiq Risvana Bayu Pambudi, Muhana Fawwazy Ilyas

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLeprosy Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeprosyMonocyteImmunologyChemotaxisMedicineBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leprosy, a significant global health concern affecting primarily the peripheral nerves and integumentary system, is influenced by the host immune system’s response, affecting its pathology, disease progression, and reaction occurrence. MCP-1, integral to leprosy’s immunological processes, holds promise as a diagnostic tool and predictor of reaction occurrence. This systematic review aimed to investigate MCP-1’s involvement in leprosy. Literature search, employing specified MeSH keywords, covered databases such as PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Wiley Online Library until September 30th, 2023, yielding seventeen relevant studies. Assessing each study’s quality with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and investigating bias using the Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-randomized Studies (RoBANS), a narrative synthesis compiled findings. Seventeen distinct studies were included, each characterized by diverse designs, sample sizes, demographics, and outcome measures, highlighting MCP-1’s potential in diagnosing leprosy, differentiating it from control groups, and discerning leprosy types. Furthermore, MCP-1 shows promise in predicting leprosy reversal reactions. Although MCP-1 offers clinical benefits, including early diagnosis and type differentiation, further research with larger sample sizes and standardized methodologies is imperative to confirm its diagnostic utility fully.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicLeprosy Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207