MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113634773 · doi:10.1586/eri.10.121

Nucleic acid amplification-based diagnosis of respiratory virus infections

2010· review· en· W2113634773 on OpenAlexaff
James B. Mahony

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Anti-infective Therapy · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirologyMultiplexBiologyVirusNucleic acidMultiplex polymerase chain reactionPopulationPolymerase chain reactionMedicineBioinformaticsGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The appearance of eight new respiratory viruses in the human population in the past 9 years, including two new pandemics (SARS coronavirus in 2003 and swine-origin influenza A/H1N1 in 2009), has tested the ability of virology laboratories to develop diagnostic tests to identify these viruses. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NATs) that first appeared two decades ago have been developed for both conventional and emerging viruses and now form the backbone of the clinical laboratory. NATs provide fast, accurate and sensitive detection of respiratory viruses and have significantly increased our understanding of the epidemiology of these viruses. Multiplex PCR assays have been introduced recently and several commercial tests are now available. The final chapter in the evolution of respiratory virus diagnostics will be the addition of allelic discrimination and detection of single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with antiviral resistance to multiplex assays. These resistance assays together with new viral load tests will enable clinical laboratories to provide physicians with important information for optimal treatment of patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.005

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations99
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Anti-infective TherapySame topicRespiratory viral infections researchFrench-language works237,207