[Reliability of Amplicor Mycobacteria Kit for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex and Mycobacterium intracellulare: results of cooperative study among 331 laboratories in 2000].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amplicor Mycobacterium Kit (Roch Diagnostics: Japan) is the most widely used kit in Japan for the diagnosis of mycobacteria infections, especially those caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Mycobacterium avium and Mycobacterium intracellulare. We evaluated the reliability of the kit in co-operation with 331 laboratories using the kit in routine examination. We distributed specially prepared 4 test samples to each laboratories. The negative sample was NALC-NaOH treated sputum which showed "negative" when tested by this kit and positive samples were NALC-NaOH treated sputum containing M. bovis or M. intracellurare. False-positive results were reported in 6 out of 331 laboratories (1.8%) and false-negative results were reported from 7 laboratories (2.1%). (The details were 1 out of 331 labs for TB-H sample, 5 out of 331 labs for TB-L sample and 1 out of 316 in MIN sample.) Statistical significance between MWP method and COBAS method was not significant. After receiving and evaluating the test results on the 4 samples, the follow up questionnaires were sent out to 22 laboratories which reported incorrect results and low optical density (O.D.) on positive control. Results of this questionnaire suggested that it was important to follow the package insert instructions and to follow the correct procedures for PCR assay. These results suggested that Amplicor Mycobacterium Kit is reliable for rapid diagnosis of Mycobacteria infections.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".