Evaluation of Three Automated Nucleic Acid Amplification Systems for Detection of <i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i> and <i>Neisseria gonorrhoeae</i> in First-Void Urine Specimens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of 500 first-void urine specimens were tested for the presence of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae nucleic acids using ProbeTec ET reagents on a Viper platform (BD Diagnostics, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada), Aptima Combo 2 reagents on a Tigris platform (Gen-Probe, Inc., San Diego, CA), and Abbott RealTime CT/NG reagents on an m2000 platform (Abbott Molecular Diagnostics, Des Plaines, IL). The performance of the three assays for detection of N. gonorrhoeae was comparable, but detection of C. trachomatis by the three assays showed more variation. All three platforms were suitable for the detection of C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae, but additional factors, such as maximum daily specimen throughput, are important in evaluating automated systems for C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae detection in high-volume laboratories.
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 | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".