MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The application of latent class analysis for diagnostic test validation of chronic Trypanosoma cruzi infection in blood donors

2002· article· en· W2037669689 on OpenAlexaff
Dante Mário Langhi, José Orlando Bordin, Adauto Castelo, Stephen D. Walter, Hélio Moraes‐Souza, Robert J. Stumpf

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrypanosoma species research and implications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIIfSerologyGold standard (test)ImmunoassayIndirect immunofluorescenceAntibodyChagas diseaseLatent class modelMedicineTrypanosoma cruziImmunologyBiologyVirologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main strategy to prevent transfusion-associated Chagas disease is the identification of T. cruzi-infected blood donors by serological screening tests, however there is no perfect serological gold standard. We evaluated an enzyme immunoassay (EIA), an indirect hemaglutination (IHA), and an indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) test for detecting T. cruzi antibodies in Brazilian blood donors. The results were submitted to latent class analysis, and a radioimmunopreciptation (RIPA) test was performed on repeatedly positive samples. Among 1951 donors, 11 (0.56%) were positive by EIA, 6 (0.31%) by IHA and 16 (0.82%) by IIF. Six samples were positive with all tests, while 4 reacted with EIA and IIF. The RIPA was positive in 6 (75.0%), 7 (66.6%), and 4 (54.0%) samples reacting by the EIA, IHA and IIF tests, respectively. The latent class model detected a high sensitivity rate (100%) for the EIA and IIF, and a specificity rate of 99.95% and 99.69% for the EIA and IIF tests, respectively. The probability of being case according to the model was 99.92% when both EIA and IIF were positive, and 100% for the association of EIA, IIF, and IHA.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations27
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Brazilian Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicTrypanosoma species research and implicationsFrench-language works237,207