MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PCR Detection of <i>Escherichia coli</i> O157:H7 Directly from Stools: Evaluation of Commercial Extraction Methods for Purifying Fecal DNA

2000· article· en· W2134990479 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

VenueJournal of Clinical Microbiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEscherichia coli research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEscherichia coliDNA extractionFecesBiologyDNAMicrobiologyPolymerase chain reactionBacteriaEnterobacteriaceaeGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid identification of Escherichia coli O157:H7 is important for patient management and for prompt epidemiological investigations. We evaluated one in-house method and three commercially available kits for their ability to extract E. coli O157:H7 DNA directly from stool specimens for PCR. Of the 153 stool specimens tested, 107 were culture positive and 46 were culture negative. The sensitivities and specificities of the in-house enrichment method, IsoQuick kit, NucliSens kit, and QIAamp kit were comparable, as follows: 83 and 98%, 85 and 100%, 74 and 98%, and 86 and 100%, respectively. False-negative PCR results may be due to the presence of either inherent inhibitors or small numbers of organisms. The presence of large amounts of bacteria relative to the amount of the E. coli O157:H7 target may result in the lower sensitivities of the assays. All commercial kits were rapid and easy to use, although DNA extracted with the QIAamp kit did not require further dilution of the DNA template prior to PCR.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.371 · 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