Evaluation of Adult Chronic Chagas' Heart Disease Diagnosis by Molecular and Serological Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chagas' disease caused by Trypanosoma cruzi is endemic in Latin America. T. cruzi presents heterogeneous populations and comprises two main genetic lineages, named T. cruzi I and T. cruzi II. Diagnosis in the chronic phase is based on conventional serological tests, including indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and diagnosis in the acute phase based on parasitological methods, including hemoculture. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic procedures of Chagas' disease in adult patients in the chronic phase by using a PCR assay and conventional serological tests, including TESA-blot as the gold standard. Samples were obtained from 240 clinical chronic chagasic patients. The sensitivities, compared to that of TESA-blot, were 70% for PCR using the kinetoplast region, 75% for PCR using the nuclear repetitive region, 99% for IIF, and 95% for ELISA. According to the serological tests results, we recommend that researchers assess the reliability and sensitivity of the commercial kit Chagatest ELISA recombinant, version 3.0 (Chagatest Rec v3.0; Wiener Lab, Rosario, Argentina), due to the lack of sensitivity. Based on our analysis, we concluded that PCR cannot be validated as a conventional diagnostic technique for Chagas' disease. These data have been corroborated by low levels of concordance with serology test results. It is recommended that PCR be used only for alternative diagnostic support. Using the nuclear repetitive region of T. cruzi, PCR could also be applicable for monitoring patients receiving etiologic treatment.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".