MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994822124 · doi:10.7705/biomedica.v22i1.1137

La inmunofluorescencia indirecta como prueba suplementaria para confirmar infección por VIH-1: experiencia del Instituto Nacional de Salud, 1993-2000

2002· article· es· W1994822124 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jorge Bóshell, Carlos Álvarez, Sonia Marrugo, María Consuelo Rojas, Blanca Marina Rodríguez, Martha González, Berta Gómez

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomédica · 2002
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and Retrovirus Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)GynecologyMedicineBiologyMolecular biologyVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A team at the Colombian National Institute of Health (INS) has demonstrated the usefulness and suitability of the Immunofluorescent Antibody Test (IFAT) as a confirmatory assay for HIV-1. The assay followed a flow chart method recommended by the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) and the Federal Center for AIDS of Canada. The specificity of the IFAT assay (IFI-VIH1-INS) for 925 serum samples was 100% when compared with two different Western blot (WB) assays. The IFI-VIH1-INS showed a sensitivity of 61% across 6,137 human sera. Although its specificity is excellent, the sensitivity of the IFI-VIH1-INS assay is slightly lower than other IFAT assays (41% of 975 samples were indeterminate in both IFAT assays and WB tests). After implementation of this assay in more than 6,000 serum samples between 1993 and 2000, the INS saved more than Col $340,000,000 or US $170.000 in its HIV1 testing program.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomédicaSame topicT-cell and Retrovirus StudiesFrench-language works237,207