MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2301195050 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncw254

GHSI EMERGENCY RADIONUCLIDE BIOASSAY LABORATORY NETWORK – SUMMARY OF THE SECOND EXERCISE

2016· article· en· W2301195050 on OpenAlex
Chunsheng Li, Christine Bartizel, P. Battisti, Axel Böttger, Céline Bouvier, Antonio Capote-Cuellar, Zhanat Carr, Derek Hammond, Martina Hartmann, Tarja Heikkinen, Robert L. Jones, Eunjoo Kim, Raymond Ko, Roberto Koga, B. Kukhta, Lorna H. Mitchell, Ryan Morhard, F. Paquet, Debora Quayle, Petr Rulík, Baki Sadi, Aleksanin Sergei, I. Sierra, Wanderson de Oliveira Sousa, Gyula Szabó

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRadioactive contamination and transfer
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
FundersNational Institutes of HealthWorld Health Organization
KeywordsRadionuclideSample (material)PreparednessBioassayMedicineEnvironmental scienceMedical physicsReceiptEnvironmental healthComputer scienceBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Global Health Security Initiative (GHSI) established a laboratory network within the GHSI community to develop collective surge capacity for radionuclide bioassay in response to a radiological or nuclear emergency as a means of enhancing response capability, health outcomes and community resilience. GHSI partners conducted an exercise in collaboration with the WHO Radiation Emergency Medical Preparedness and Assistance Network and the IAEA Response and Assistance Network, to test the participating laboratories (18) for their capabilities in in vitro assay of biological samples, using a urine sample spiked with multiple high-risk radionuclides (90Sr, 106Ru, 137Cs, and 239Pu). Laboratories were required to submit their reports within 72 h following receipt of the sample, using a pre-formatted template, on the procedures, methods and techniques used to identify and quantify the radionuclides in the sample, as well as the bioassay results with a 95% confidence interval. All of the participating laboratories identified and measured all or some of the radionuclides in the sample. However, gaps were identified in both the procedures used to assay multiple radionuclides in one sample, as well as in the methods or techniques used to assay specific radionuclides in urine. Two-third of the participating laboratories had difficulties in determining all the radionuclides in the sample. Results from this exercise indicate that challenges remain with respect to ensuring that results are delivered in a timely, consistent and reliable manner to support medical interventions. Laboratories within the networks are encouraged to work together to develop and maintain collective capabilities and capacity for emergency bioassay, which is an important component of radiation emergency response.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.192 · 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