Enhanced Viral Etiological Diagnosis of Respiratory System Infection Outbreaks by Use of a Multitarget Nucleic Acid Amplification Assay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study was undertaken to assess the utility of the xTAG respiratory viral panel (RVP) for enhanced laboratory investigation of respiratory outbreaks. Specimens (n = 1,108) from 244 suspected respiratory virus outbreaks in 2006 and 2007 in Alberta, Canada, were included in the study. Testing by direct fluorescent antigen detection (DFA) and various in-house nucleic acid amplification tests (NATs) for common respiratory viruses provided an etiological diagnosis in 177 outbreaks (72.5%), with 524 samples testing positive (47.3%) for a respiratory virus. Two hundred samples from 51 unresolved outbreaks were further tested by RVP retrospectively. Fifty-eight samples from 30 unresolved outbreaks had a respiratory virus detected by RVP (47 picornavirus-positive, 9 coronavirus-positive, and 2 influenza virus A-positive samples). Overall, detection of a viral etiological agent was achieved in 90.8% of outbreaks using a combination of DFA, NATs, and RVP. Use of RVP enhances the laboratory investigation of respiratory virus outbreaks and facilitates appropriate patient and outbreak management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".