Correlation of ELISA Optical Density With Clinical Diagnosis of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for antiplatelet factor 4 (anti-PF4)/heparin antibodies is expressed in terms of optical density (OD). Previous studies have shown correlation between OD and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) diagnosis. However, these were mainly laboratory based. OBJECTIVE: Retrospective correlation of clinical HIT to ELISA OD. PATIENTS/METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study involving 104 patients with a positive ELISA for anti-PF4/heparin antibodies between 2008 and May 2012. For each patient, a clinical diagnosis was adjudicated based on different features including "4T scores," laboratory results, and a 3-month clinical follow-up. RESULTS: In this study, 28.8% of the patients were HIT positive, and 71.2% HIT negative. Patients with positive diagnosis had significantly higher mean OD (2.15 ± 0.76 vs 0.83 ± 0.62). Patients with OD <1.0 only had 3.4% positive diagnosis versus 45.5% for OD 1.0 to 2.0 and 78% for >2.0 units. CONCLUSION: This study is a clinical confirmation that ELISA OD results are correlated with the probability of a clinical diagnosis of HIT.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".