Multicenter Study of a Rapid Molecular-Based Assay for the Diagnosis of Group B Streptococcus Colonization in Pregnant Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current prevention of infection due to group B Streptococcus (GBS) involves giving intrapartum antibiotics to women on the basis of either antenatal culture colonization status or presence of risk factors. METHODS: We prospectively compared the performance characteristics of a rapid molecular diagnostic test (IDI-Strep B; Infectio Diagnostic) with culture for intrapartum GBS detection after 36 weeks' gestation in 5 North American centers during the period September 2001-May 2002. Antenatal GBS screening was done according to the usual practice of participating hospitals. Two combined vaginal/anal specimens were obtained from participants during labor by use of standard techniques and processed by the same laboratories that processed the antenatal specimens. Each swab sample was processed simultaneously by culture and with IDI-Strep B. The collected specimens were randomized for order of testing of the swab samples by culture or the rapid test. RESULTS: Of enrolled women, 803 (91.1%) were eligible for analysis. The overall intrapartum GBS colonization rate by culture was 18.6% (range, 9.1%-28.7%). Compared with intrapartum culture, the molecular test had a sensitivity of 94.0% (range, 90.1%-97.8%), specificity of 95.9% (range, 94.3%-97.4%), positive predictive value of 83.8% (range, 78.2%-89.4%), and negative predictive value of 98.6% (range, 97.7%-99.5%). The molecular test was superior to antenatal cultures (sensitivity, 94% vs. 54%; P<.0001) and prediction of intrapartum status on the basis of risk factors (sensitivity, 94% vs. 42%; P<.0001). CONCLUSION: Use of this test for determination of GBS colonization during labor is highly sensitive and specific and may lead to a further reduction in rates of neonatal GBS disease.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".