Development of a Canadian Standardized Protocol for Subtyping Methicillin-Resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> Using Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A panel of 24 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains was distributed to 15 laboratories in Canada to evaluate their in-house pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) protocols and interpretation criteria. Attempts to compare fingerprint images using computer-aided analysis were not successful due to variability in individual laboratory PFGE protocols. In addition, individual site interpretation of the fingerprint patterns was inadequate, as 7 of 13 sites (54%) made at least one error in interpreting the fingerprints from the panel. A 2-day standardized PFGE protocol (culture to gel image) was developed and distributed to all of the sites. Each site was requested to use the standardized protocol on five strains from the original panel. Thirteen sites submitted gel images for comparisons. The protocol demonstrated excellent reproducibility and allowed interlaboratory comparisons with Molecular Analyst DST software (Bio-Rad) and 1.5% band tolerance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".