MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048406080 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa044029

Screening the Blood Supply for West Nile Virus RNA by Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing

2005· article· en· W2048406080 on OpenAlexaff
Michael P. Busch, Sally Caglioti, Eugene F. Robertson, Joan D. McAuley, Leslie H. Tobler, Hany Kamel, Jeffrey M. Linnen, Venkatakrishna Shyamala, Peter Tomasulo, Steven Kleinman

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsSeroconversionNucleic acid testMedicineViremiaNucleic acidBlood donationsVirologyNucleic Acid Amplification TestsAntibodyImmunologyVirusBiologyInternal medicineDiseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Infectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The use of nucleic acid amplification tests of "minipools" of 16 samples to screen blood donors for West Nile virus RNA began in July 2003. We report the yield and characteristics of positive donations and the incremental yield and safety of nucleic acid amplification tests of individual donations. METHODS: Reactive minipools were analyzed to identify the individual reactive donations. For the regions with the highest yield on minipool testing, retrospective nucleic acid amplification testing was performed on individual donations that were negative on minipool testing. Reactive donations were confirmed by alternative nucleic acid amplification tests and IgM and IgG tests, and donors were followed to document seroconversion. RESULTS: From July 1 through October 31, 2003, 677,603 donations were prospectively screened for West Nile virus by minipool testing, yielding 183 confirmed viremic donations (0.027 percent, or 1 in 3703 donations). Retrospective individual testing of 23,088 donations from high-prevalence regions that were negative on minipool testing yielded 30 additional units with a low level of viremia, with 14 additional viremic units detected by prospective testing of individual donations late in the 2003 transmission season. Of all the viremic units detected, 5 percent were detected only by individual testing and were negative for IgM antibody, 29 percent were detected by individual testing after IgM seroconversion, and 66 percent were detected by minipool testing. West Nile virus infection was confirmed in both recipients of IgM-negative units that were reactive on individual testing, whereas neither recipient of antibody-positive blood components that were reactive on individual testing was infected. In 2004, prospective testing of individual donations in regions that yielded donations that were reactive on minipool testing resulted in a 32 percent incremental yield of units with a low level of viremia that would have been missed by minipool testing. CONCLUSIONS: Although nucleic acid amplification testing of minipools of blood donations prevented hundreds of cases of West Nile virus infection in 2003, it failed to detect units with a low level of viremia, some of which were antibody-negative and infectious. These data support the use of targeted nucleic acid amplification testing of individual donations in high-prevalence regions, a strategy that was implemented successfully in 2004.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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

Citations225
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207