MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323556554 · doi:10.1021/nn102873w

Rapid Screening of Genetic Biomarkers of Infectious Agents Using Quantum Dot Barcodes

2011· article· en· W2323556554 on OpenAlexafffund
Supratim Giri, Edward A. Sykes, Travis L. Jennings, Warren C. W. Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiosensors and Analytical Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBarcodeQuantum dotInfectious disease (medical specialty)MalariaComputer scienceComputational biologyVirologyNanotechnologyBiologyDiseaseMedicineMaterials scienceImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of a rapid and sensitive infectious disease diagnostic platform would enable one to select proper treatment and to contain the spread of the disease. Here we examined the feasibility of using quantum dot (QD) barcodes to detect genetic biomarkers of the bloodborne pathogens HIV, malaria, hepatitis B and C, and syphilis. The genetic fragments from these pathogens were detected in less than 10 min at a sample volume of 200 μL and with a detection limit in the femtomol range. A next step for the advancement of QD barcode technology to the clinic will require validation of the technology with human samples to assess for matrix effects, head-to-head comparison with existing detection method, development of techniques to automate the assay and detection process, and simplification of analytical device for the read-out of the barcode signal. Our study provides an important intermediate step in the translation of QD barcode technology for screening infectious disease agents in the developed and developing world.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations119
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS NanoSame topicBiosensors and Analytical DetectionFrench-language works237,207