Automated screening for tuberculosis by multiparametric analysis of data obtained during routine complete blood count
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The main goal of this study was to develop a multiparametric cell population data (CPD) model that combines information from several morphologic parameters generated by DxH800, in addition to the traditional parameters regularly reported in the CBC-diff, and to test the performance of this model in screening the general population for primary tuberculosis (TB). METHODS: A total of 3741 study cases were divided into two groups, test and validation set at cut-off value of 6000 WBCs/μL. We developed multiparametric model for primary TB screening (TB hemeprint), selected CPD, and calculated parameters which could discriminate primary TB from other non-TB diseases and normal control in test set. We applied it to the validation set, which was a set of completely different samples, to test its reproducibility if applied to a routine laboratory test. RESULTS: After screening primary TB using TB hemeprint, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 85.4%, 89.6%, 31.1%, and 99.1%, respectively, in primary TB with lower than 6000 WBCs/μL of test set (test set-L). In primary TB with higher than 6000 WBCs/μL of test set (test set-H), those values were 83.1%, 85.6%, 29.7%, and 98.6%, respectively. There were only 0.4% (2/461) and 0.6% (2/326) of normal control samples included in test set-L and -H, respectively. Diagnostic efficiencies except sensitivity in each validation set were very comparable with those in each test set. CONCLUSION: Tuberculosis hemeprint may allow us to screen primary TB with acceptable sensitivity and specificity using combination of TB-specific CPD and calculated parameters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".