Diagnostic validation of three test methods for detection of cyprinid herpesvirus 3 (CyHV-3)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyprinid herpesvirus 3 (CyHV-3) is the aetiological agent of koi herpesvirus disease in koi and common carp. The disease is notifiable to the World Organisation for Animal Health. Three tests-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), conventional PCR (cPCR) and virus isolation by cell culture (VI)-were validated to assess their fitness as diagnostic tools for detection of CyHV-3. Test performance metrics of diagnostic accuracy were sensitivity (DSe) and specificity (DSp). Repeatability and reproducibility were measured to assess diagnostic precision. Estimates of test accuracy, in the absence of a gold standard reference test, were generated using latent class models. Test samples originated from wild common carp naturally exposed to CyHV-3 or domesticated koi either virus free or experimentally infected with the virus. Three laboratories in Canada participated in the precision study. Moderate to high repeatability (81 to 99%) and reproducibility (72 to 97%) were observed for the qPCR and cPCR tests. The lack of agreement observed between some of the PCR test pair results was attributed to cross-contamination of samples with CyHV-3 nucleic acid. Accuracy estimates for the PCR tests were 99% for DSe and 93% for DSp. Poor precision was observed for the VI test (4 to 95%). Accuracy estimates for VI/qPCR were 90% for DSe and 88% for DSp. Collectively, the results show that the CyHV-3 qPCR test is a suitable tool for surveillance, presumptive diagnosis and certification of individuals or populations as CyHV-3 free.
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 | 0.020 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".