Detection of Salmonella typhi agglutinins in sera of patients with other febrile illnesses and healthy individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Widal test is frequently applied for the detection of Salmonella agglutinins to diagnose Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi infection. There are however a number of controversies challenging the diagnostic utility of this test. This study was performed to determine the prevalence of Salmonella agglutinins in patients with other febrile illnesses and healthy blood donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sera from 50 healthy blood donors were compared for the presence of Salmonella agglutinins in various groups of patients with other febrile illnesses using Widal test in the division of Serology and Immunology at King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh. The patient groups of other febrile illnesses included infections with Beta-hemolytic streptococcus (n = 50), Brucella (n = 46), Helicobacter pylori (n = 24), Treponema pallidum (n = 30), Toxoplasma (n = 44), and other parasites (n = 20). RESULTS: Majority of the patients and normal individuals were tested positive for Widal test at dilution of less than 1 : 40 both for the O (62.5%) and H (64.6%) antigen. A decreasing trend in Widal reactivity was observed with increasing dilutions of the serum samples. At 1 : 160 titer, which is generally considered as a cut off point for positive Widal test, 6.4 and 11% individuals had positive Widal test for O and H Salmonella antigens, respectively. CONCLUSION: Detection of a significant number of positive Widal tests in conditions where it is expected to be nonreactive appears to be a serious problem in making a correct diagnosis of typhoid fever, thus challenging the diagnostic utility of the Widal test.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".