MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402371337 · doi:10.3390/pathogens13090773

Anthrax in Humans, Animals, and the Environment and the One Health Strategies for Anthrax Control

2024· review· en· W4402371337 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePathogens · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacillus and Francisella bacterial research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacillus anthracisTransmission (telecommunications)Biological warfareDiseaseAnthrax vaccinesPublic healthEnvironmental healthDisease controlPathogenAnthrax toxinMedicineBiologyImmunologyBacteriaToxicologyEngineeringPathologyImmunization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

. The causative agent can also be used as a biological weapon. Spores of these bacteria can sustain extreme environmental conditions and remain viable in soil for decades. Domestic and wild ruminants are highly susceptible to this pathogen, which usually presents as a peracute to acute disease. In humans, cutaneous anthrax is frequent but pulmonary and enteric anthrax are more serious. Humans, animals, and the environment are all involved, making anthrax a perfect target for a One Health approach. The environment plays a key role in disease transmission. At a time when the One Health concept is not mere slogans, collaborative efforts of medical professionals, veterinarians, and environmental scientists will be valuable for the prevention and control of this disease. In this review, we discussed the transmission dynamics of anthrax in the environment, animals, and humans, as well as One Health strategies to control and prevent anthrax.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.292 · 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