MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023850468 · doi:10.1081/ias-100104705

FLUORESCENCE POLARIZATION ASSAY FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF BRUCELLOSIS: A REVIEW

2001· review· en· W2023850468 on OpenAlexaff
K. Nielsen, D. Gall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Immunoassay and Immunochemistry · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicBrucella: diagnosis, epidemiology, treatment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Food Inspection Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluorescence anisotropyComplement fixation testAntigenFluorescenceSerologyDirect agglutination testChemistryConjugated systemEpitopeFluorophoreAntibodyChromatographyBiologyOpticsImmunologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluorescence polarization assay (FPA) is based on the rotational differences between a small soluble antigen molecule in solution (labelled with a fluorochrome) and the antigen molecule complexed with its antibody. A small molecule will rotate randomly at a rapid rate, resulting in rapid depolarization of light, while a larger complex molecule will rotate slower and depolarize light at a reduced rate. The rate change in depolarization can be measured. The FPA is a homogeneous assay which does not require removal of unreacted reagents and can, therefore, be performed very quickly and, given portable equipment, in the laboratory and in the field. The latter obviates the need for shipping samples and eliminates waiting for results, as well as reducing test costs. The FPA technology has been developed and validated for the serological diagnosis of brucellosis in cattle, swine, sheep, goats, bison, and cervids. Sufficient cross reactivity of the common epitopes of Brucella abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis O-polysaccharide (OPS) allowed for the use of a single antigen for all species of smooth Brucella and animals. The OPS prepared from B. abortus S1119.3 was conjugated with fluorscein isothiocyanate (FITC). The FPA was initially developed for testing serum; however, the technology has been extended to testing whole blood and milk from individual animals or bulk tank samples pooled from 2000 or fewer animals. The accuracy of the FPA equalled or exceeded those obtained using other serological tests such as the buffered antigen plate agglutination test (BPAT), the milk ring test (MRT), the complement fixation test (CFT), the indirect enzyme immunoassay (IELISA), and the competitive enzyme immunoassay (CELISA).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations97
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Immunoassay and ImmunochemistrySame topicBrucella: diagnosis, epidemiology, treatmentFrench-language works237,207