MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127852460 · doi:10.2460/javma.246.2.236

Sensitivity and specificity of repeated test results from a commercial milk enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for detection of Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis in dairy cattle

2015· article· en· W2127852460 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Carrie J. Lavers, Ian R. Dohoo, Shawn McKenna, Greg Keefe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMycobacterium research and diagnosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersAtlantic Veterinary College
KeywordsHerdMycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosisParatuberculosisFecesVeterinary medicineDairy cattleBiologyAnimal scienceMycobacteriumMedicineMicrobiologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the sensitivity and specificity of results of initial and repeated milk ELISAs (at 6- or 12-month intervals) to detect cows that were shedding Mycobacterium avium subsp paratuberculosis (ie, were infectious) and to evaluate factors influencing the probability that the results of a repeated milk ELISA would be positive for an infectious cow if the results of the initial milk ELISA were negative. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. ANIMALS: 3,145 dairy cows from 32 herds. PROCEDURES: Herds from the 3 Maritime provinces in Canada (Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia), participating in a Dairy Herd Improvement program, and that had undergone a prior Mycobacterium avium subsp paratuberculosis awareness project were selected for the study. Sample collection occurred between April 2009 and March 2011 with milk and fecal samples collected from all lactating cows in study herds every 6 months. Herds completing < 3 herd visits with collection of individual cow fecal or milk samples, within this sampling timeframe, were excluded from analyses. Fecal samples were cultured in liquid medium and a cow was defined as infectious if ≥ 1 sample was culture positive (reference test). A milk ELISA (index test) was completed with a commercial kit, following manufacturer's instructions. RESULTS: For a 6-month test interval, sensitivities of the milk ELISA to detect infectious cows were 22.0% and 32.6% for initial and combined initial and repeated tests (parallel interpretation), respectively. Specificity of the initial ELISA was 99.6% and was 99.2% for combined tests. For a 12-month test interval, sensitivities of the milk ELISA to detect infectious cows were 25.6% and 45.3% for initial and combined initial and repeated tests (parallel interpretation), respectively. Specificity of the initial ELISA was 99.6% and was 98.9% for combined tests. In infectious cows, magnitude of the initial negative ELISA result was a positive predictor for a positive repeated ELISA result. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results of a repeated milk ELISA improved detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp paratuberculosis infectious cows, with minimal loss of specificity. A 12-month test interval provided a greater increase in sensitivity, relative to an initial test, than did a 6-month interval. Infectious cows with an initial negative milk ELISA result close to the cutoff for a positive test were more likely to have positive results on a repeated ELISA. Repeated testing improved detection of infectious cows and reduced risk of misclassification compared with a single ELISA result.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Veterinary Medical AssociationSame topicMycobacterium research and diagnosisFrench-language works237,207