MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107635807 · doi:10.1080/13693780410001712043

Onychomycosis: a critical study of techniques and criteria for confirming the etiologic significance of nondermatophytes

2005· article· en· W2107635807 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Mycology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNail Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalMediprobe Research (Canada)University of TorontoMinistry of Health and Long Term CareMinistry of HealthSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNail (fastener)PopulationEtiologyGold standard (test)MedicinePathologyDermatologyInternal medicineMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nondermatophytic filamentous fungi (NDF) other than Scytalidium species are variously said to cause between 0 and 50% of all toenail onychomycoses, though most estimates are in the 2-5% range. Due to the difficulty of obtaining 'gold standard' control data for comparison, the accuracy of many laboratory evaluation processes used to deal with potential NDF onychomycoses has never been rigorously measured, thus allowing use of differing interpretations of the significance of cultures. To allow valid comparison of these procedures and interpretations, a large series of patients who declined treatment were sampled on multiple occasions from all apparently onychomycotic toenails until adequate certainty had been attained that all etiologic agents had been isolated and, where necessary, confirmed as etiologic via consistent repeated isolation. This information was used to evaluate results that had been obtained in the initial direct microscopy and culture studies for the same patient population, as such results are strongly relied on in routine diagnosis. Direct microscopy (KOH) was found to be 73.8% sensitive for dermatophytes and 67.2% sensitive for proven etiologic NDF (difference not significant). Culture of the initial specimen coincidentally had a sensitivity of 74.6% for both fungal groups. KOH and culture in tandem were 83.9% sensitive for indicating fungal etiology based on the first specimen. Different evaluative frameworks currently used to interpret NDF isolations were contrasted. The 'classic' evaluation procedure, in which all NDF considered etiologic must be isolated from at least two successive nail specimens, at least one of which must be microscopic positive for compatible fungal filaments, had a sensitivity of 59.5% but a specificity of 100% for true NDF infections and mixed NDF/dermatophyte infections. The most widely used 'simple association' evaluation criterion, in which NDF outgrowth is considered etiologic whenever direct microscopy is positive for fungal elements and no dermatophyte grows out from the initial specimen, had a sensitivity of 53.6% and a specificity of 70.3% for NDF infections. A frequently criticized, but in some quarters still advocated, variant of the simple association criterion considers NDF outgrowth to be significant whenever the corresponding specimen is positive for fungal filaments in direct microscopy; application of this criterion yielded a sensitivity of 60.7% for true infections but a specificity of only 42%. With the aid of two standard notes soliciting repeat specimens, the classic criterion was able to attain 92.7% accuracy in recognizing all NDF etiologic agents and 100% accuracy in disregarding all contaminants from initial specimens that were positive in direct microscopy and yielded a filamentous fungus in initial culture. Even in exhaustive longitudinal study, only 20.2% of NDF infections were found to be associated with a concurrent dermatophytosis. In auxiliary studies, some nails remained NDF-infected after dermatophytes had been successfully eliminated by therapy.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.362 · 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