Identifying the panorama of potential pandemic pathogens and their key characteristics: a systematic scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The globe has recently seen several terrifying pandemics and outbreaks, underlining the ongoing danger presented by infectious microorganisms. This literature review aims to explore the wide range of infections that have the potential to lead to pandemics in the present and the future and pave the way to the conception of epidemic early warning systems. A systematic review was carried out to identify and compile data on infectious agents known to cause pandemics and those that pose future concerns. One hundred and fifteen articles were included in the review. They provided insights on 25 pathogens that could start or contribute to creating pandemic situations. Diagnostic procedures, clinical symptoms, and infection transmission routes were analyzed for each of these pathogens. Each infectious agent's potential is discussed, shedding light on the crucial aspects that render them potential threats to the future. This literature review provides insights for policymakers, healthcare professionals, and researchers in their quest to identify potential pandemic pathogens, and in their efforts to enhance pandemic preparedness through building early warning systems for continuous epidemiological monitoring.
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 | 0.016 | 0.080 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.027 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".