Quality evaluation of LC‐MS/MS‐based <i>E. coli</i> H antigen typing (MS‐H) through label‐free quantitative data analysis in a clinical sample setup
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The need for rapid and accurate H typing is evident during Escherichia coli outbreak situations. This study explores the transition of MS-H, a method originally developed for rapid H antigen typing of E. coli using LC-MS/MS of flagella digest of reference strains and some clinical strains, to E. coli isolates in clinical scenario through quantitative analysis and method validation. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Motile and nonmotile strains were examined in batches to simulate clinical sample scenario. Various LC-MS/MS batch run procedures and MS-H typing rules were compared and summarized through quantitative analysis of MS-H data output for a standard method development. RESULTS: Label-free quantitative data analysis of MS-H typing was proven very useful for examining the quality of MS-H result and the effects of some sample carryovers from motile E. coli isolates. Based on this, a refined procedure and protein identification rule specific for clinical MS-H typing was established and validated. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: With LC-MS/MS batch run procedure and database search parameter unique for E. coli MS-H typing, the standard procedure maintained high accuracy and specificity in clinical situations, and its potential to be used in a clinical setting was clearly established.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".