MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142589283 · doi:10.1128/cvi.00294-12

Results of Continuous Monitoring of the Performance of Rubella Virus IgG and Hepatitis B Virus Surface Antibody Assays Using Trueness Controls in a Multicenter Trial

2012· article· en· W2142589283 on OpenAlexaffabout
T. Kruk, Sam Ratnam, Jutta K. Preiksaitis, Allan Lau, Todd F. Hatchette, Greg B. Horsman, Paul Van Caeseele, Brian W. Timmons, Graham Tipples

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and Vaccine Immunology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Disease Control LaboratoryQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreProvincial Laboratory of Public HealthPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRubella virusSerologyRubellaMedicineExternal quality assessmentVirologyAntibodyVaccinationImmunologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conducted a multicenter trial in Canada to assess the value of using trueness controls (TC) for rubella virus IgG and hepatitis B virus surface antibody (anti-HBs) serology to determine test performance across laboratories over time. TC were obtained from a single source with known international units. Seven laboratories using different test systems and kit lots included the TC in routine assay runs of the analytes. TC measurements of 1,095 rubella virus IgG and 1,195 anti-HBs runs were plotted on Levey-Jennings control charts for individual laboratories and analyzed using a multirule quality control (MQC) scheme as well as a single three-standard-deviation (3-SD) rule. All rubella virus IgG TC results were "in control" in only one of the seven laboratories. Among the rest, "out-of-control" results ranged from 5.6% to 10% with an outlier at 20.3% by MQC and from 1.1% to 5.6% with an outlier at 13.4% by the 3-SD rule. All anti-HBs TC results were "in control" in only two laboratories. Among the rest, "out-of-control" results ranged from 3.3% to 7.9% with an outlier at 19.8% by MQC and from 0% to 3.3% with an outlier at 10.5% by the 3-SD rule. In conclusion, through the continuous monitoring of assay performance using TC and quality control rules, our trial detected significant intra- and interlaboratory, test system, and kit lot variations for both analytes. In most cases the assay rejections could be attributable to the laboratories rather than to kit lots. This has implications for routine diagnostic screening and clinical practice guidelines and underscores the value of using an approach as described above for continuous quality improvement in result reporting and harmonization for these analytes.

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 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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and Vaccine ImmunologySame topicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlFrench-language works237,207