The importance of prion research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past four decades, prion diseases have received considerable research attention owing to their potential to be transmitted within and across species as well as their consequences for human and animal health. The unprecedented nature of prions has led to the discovery of a paradigm of templated protein misfolding that underlies a diverse range of both disease-related and normal biological processes. Indeed, the "prion-like" misfolding and propagation of protein aggregates is now recognized as a common underlying disease mechanism in human neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, and the prion principle has led to the development of novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for these illnesses. Despite these advances, research into the fundamental biology of prion diseases has declined, likely due to their rarity and the absence of an acute human health crisis. Given the past translational influence, continued research on the etiology, pathogenesis, and transmission of prion disease should remain a priority. In this review, we highlight several important "unsolved mysteries" in the prion disease research field and how solving them may be crucial for the development of effective therapeutics, preventing future outbreaks of prion disease, and understanding the pathobiology of more common human neurodegenerative disorders.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".