MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2431114392 · doi:10.1186/s12917-016-0737-1

Analytical validation and establishment of reference intervals for a ‘high-sensitivity’ cardiac troponin-T assay in horses

2016· article· en· W2431114392 on OpenAlexafffund
Erin Shields, Isolde Seiden‐Long, Shannon Massie, S. Passante, Renaud Léguillette

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Veterinary Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsTroponin IReference rangePercentileBreedHorsePopulationMedicineLimits of agreementVeterinary medicineAnimal scienceInternal medicineCardiologyBiologyNuclear medicineMathematicsMyocardial infarctionStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cardiac troponin-I assays have been validated in horses.'High-sensitivity' cardiac troponin assays are now the standard in human cardiology. OBJECTIVE: Appropriately validate the'high-sensitivity' cardiac Troponin-T (hscTnT) assay for clinical use in horses, establish reference intervals, determine the biological variation, and demonstrate assay utility in selected clinical cases. METHODS: Analytical validation of the Roche hscTnT assay included within- and between-run precision, linear dose response, limit of quantitation (LoQ), stability, and comparison with cTn-I (iSTAT). Reference intervals and biological variation were determined using adult, healthy, Non-Competition Horses (N = 125) and Racing-Thoroughbreds (N = 178). HscTnT levels were measured in two horses with cardiac pathology. RESULTS: The hscTnT demonstrates acceptable within-run (L1 = 6.5 ng/L, CV 14.9 %, L2 = 10.1 ng/L, CV 8.7 %, L3 = 15.3 ng/L, CV 5.4 %) and between-run precision (L1 = 12.2 ng/L, CV 8.4 %, L2 = 57.0 ng/L, CV 8.4 %, L3 = 256.0 ng/L, CV 9.0 %). The assay was linear from 3 to 391 ng/L. The LoQ was validated at 3 ng/L. Samples demonstrated insignificant decay over freeze-thaw cycle. Comparison with cTnI assay showed excellent correlation (range: 8.0-3535.0 ng/L, R(2) = 0.9996). Reference intervals: The upper 95(th) and 99(th) percentile of the hscTnT population distribution were 6.8 and 16.2 ng/L in Non-Competition Horses, and 14.0 and 23.2 ng/L in Racing-Thoroughbreds. Between-breed, diurnal effect, and between-day variation was below LoQ. Two clinical cases with presumed cardiac pathology had hscTnT levels of 220.9 ng/L and 5723.0 ng/L. CONCLUSIONS: This benchmark study is the first to comply with CLSI guidelines, thus further establishing the performance characteristics of the hscTnT assay, and reference intervals in healthy horses. Two clinical cases demonstrated further the clinical utility of the assay.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Veterinary ResearchSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207