MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005601758 · doi:10.1002/cyto.10089

Evaluation of a universal template for single‐platform absolute T‐lymphocyte subset enumeration

2002· article· en· W2005601758 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. Bergeron, Sylvie Faucher, Tao Ding, Sieglinde Phaneuf, Francis Mandy

Bibliographic record

VenueCytometry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHealth CanadaSaskatchewan Disease Control Laboratory
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnumerationImmunophenotypingProtocol (science)Computer scienceFlow cytometryWhole bloodImmunologyMathematicsBiologyMedicinePathologyDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The single-platform absolute T-lymphocyte subset analysis was evaluated utilizing a universal protocol in a Canadian multicenter study with the collaboration of the members of the Canadian HIV Trials Network (CTN). Participants used flow cytometers and reagents of their choice for labeling and lysing whole blood. Over a 2-year period, CTN laboratories performed single-platform absolute T-lymphocyte subset enumerations on fresh and commercial stabilized blood products using commercially available microfluorospheres TruCount and Flow-Count. This multicenter evaluation demonstrated that the application of a universal template for single-platform analysis provides a generic approach that embraces a wide array of immunophenotyping settings available in clinical laboratory.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations21
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCytometrySame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207