MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013219210 · doi:10.1186/1753-6561-5-s6-o28

A new serotyping method of S. pneumoniae using an automated microarray-based assay

2011· article· en· W2013219210 on OpenAlexaff
Alain Gervaix, Jacques Corbeil, Frédéric Raymond

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Proceedings · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicMicrobial infections and disease research
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSerotypeMicroarrayMicroarray analysis techniquesComputational biologyBioinformaticsVirologyGeneBiologyGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autolysin, pneumolysin and eight other genes located in the capsular operon were first amplified using multiplex PCR. This step was followed by a tagged primer extension step targeting serotype-specific polymorphisms. The tagged primers were then assigned to a specific spot on a microarray, and processed and scanned in an ISO-certified automated molecular diagnostic system, using a confocal laser microscope. Results from the assay were exported to the analysis software/expert system that transformed genetic typing data into capsular serotype identification. Using this new technology, 51 serotypes of S. pneumoniae can be precisely and uniquely identified, including the 13 types present in the new conjugate vaccine. The remaining 39 are assigned to a serogroup. Blood, CSF and nasopharyngeal samples from children with S. pneumoniae infection or carriage were tested and serotype was confirmed by sequence analysis. 26 different serotypes were detected and concordance between both methods was greater than 96%. This automated microarray assay is robust and could identify precise serotypes of S. pneumoniae directly from clinical samples. It is easy to handle and will be most useful in clinical settings and for the evaluation of serotype prevalence changes.

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 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC ProceedingsSame topicMicrobial infections and disease researchFrench-language works237,207