MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158577980 · doi:10.1586/14737159.6.5.761

Rapid antigen detection testing in diagnosing group A β-hemolytic streptococcal pharyngitis

2006· review· en· W2158577980 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander K. C. Leung, Rachel Newman, Ashir Kumar, H. Dele Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Molecular Diagnostics · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStreptococcal Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharyngitisAntigenThroat cultureMedicineThroatImmunoassayAcute PharyngitisStreptococcusGroup AGold standard (test)Streptococcus pyogenesImmunologyInternal medicineAntibodyStaphylococcus aureusSurgeryBiologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Group A beta-hemolytic streptococcus (GABHS) is the most common bacterial cause of acute pharyngitis. Clinical criteria alone are not reliable enough to diagnose GABHS pharyngitis. Microbiological-testing is required for correct diagnosis. Although a throat swab culture remains the gold standard for documenting the presence of GABHS, a significant disadvantage of the culture is the delayed time of 1-2 days to obtain results. Most rapid antigen detection tests can provide results in less than 15 min. Rapid identification and treatment of patients with GABHS pharyngitis can reduce the risk of the spread of disease, may shorten the duration of symptoms, decrease the incidence of suppurative complications, decrease the amount of time lost from school/work, decrease the inappropriate use of antibiotics, reduce patient/parent dissatisfaction and alleviate the need for costly follow-up visits. All rapid antigen detection tests involve extraction of the group-specific carbohydrate antigen from the GABHS cell wall and identification of the antigen by an immunological reaction. There are numerous rapid antigen detection testing methods, namely latex agglutination, enzyme immunoassay, optical immunoassay, chemiluminescent DNA probes and PCR methods. Most of the rapid antigen detection tests that are currently in use have an excellent specificity of greater than 95% and a sensitivity of greater than or equal to 90%. Owing to the high specificity of the rapid antigen detection tests, a positive rapid antigen detection test is accepted as adequate for the diagnosis of GABHS pharyngitis. Conversely, confirmation of a negative antigen detection test with a throat culture result is necessary, unless the physician has ascertained in his/her practice that the sensitivity of the rapid antigen test used is comparable with that of a throat culture.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.324 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations47
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Molecular DiagnosticsSame topicStreptococcal Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207