Rapid PCR detection of group a streptococcus from flocked throat swabs: A retrospective clinical study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rapid diagnosis of GAS pharyngitis may improve patient care by ensuring that patients with GAS pharyngitis are treated quickly and also avoiding unnecessary use of antibiotics in those without GAS infection. Very few molecular methods for detection of GAS in clinical throat swab specimens have been described. METHODS: We performed a study of a laboratory-developed internally-controlled rapid Group A streptococcus (GAS) PCR assay using flocked swab throat specimens. We compared the GAS PCR assay to GAS culture results using a collection of archived throat swab samples obtained during a study comparing the performance of conventional and flocked throat swabs. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the GAS PCR assay as compared to the reference standard was 96.0% (95% CI 90.1% to 98.4%), specificity 98.6% (95% CI 95.8% to 99.5%), positive predictive value (PPV) 96.9% (95% CI 91.4% to 99.0%) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 98.1% (95% CI 95.2% to 99.2%). For conventional swab cultures, sensitivity was 96.0% (95% CI 90.1% to 98.4%), specificity 100% (95% CI 98.2% to 100%), PPV 100%, (95% CI 96.1% to 100%) and NPV 98.1% (95% CI 95.2% to 99.3%) CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, the GAS PCR assay appeared to perform as well as conventional throat swab culture, the current standard of practice. Since the GAS PCR assay, including DNA extraction, can be performed in approximately 1 hour, prospective studies of this assay are warranted to evaluate the clinical impact of the assay on management of patients with pharyngitis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".