MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749035995 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofx163.1542

Lysis Centrifugation Method for the Direct Identification of Positive Blood Cultures Using MALDI-TOF MS

2017· article· en· W2749035995 on OpenAlexaff
Hilal Al Sidairi, Khalifa Binkhamis, Joline Head, Ross Davidson

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacilliBlood cultureMicrobiologyAgar plateGram-Positive CocciLysisMatrix-assisted laser desorption/ionizationCentrifugationGram-positive bacteriaBacteriaMedicineBiologyChromatographyChemistryImmunologyAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) bacterial identification has revolutionized clinical microbiology. Typically, bacteria must be first cultured prior to identification; however, several techniques have emerged that allow the identification of bacteria directly from certain specimen types, including blood cultures. The aim of this study was to compare a direct MALDI-TOF MS identification technique of positive blood cultures with those having at least 4–6 hours of sufficient growth Only blood cultures flagged overnight as positive by the BD Bactec® were included for study. A one ml aliquot was drawn and immediately processed using a lysis centrifugation technique and analyzed using MALDI-TOF (bioMérieux). Positive blood culture samples were also sub-cultured onto agar plates as per standard laboratory practice, incubated for 4–6 hours and if sufficient growth was present, processed using MALDI-TOF. Cultures with insufficient growth are incubated overnight. Direct identifications were compared with those where sufficient growth was achieved Between June 2015 to February 2016, 300 positive blood cultures were included for study. Of these there were 156 Gram-positive cocci, 112 Gram-negative bacilli, 15 anaerobic organisms, 11 Gram-positive bacilli and 6 yeast. Using a confidence threshold of 99.9%, 69% of all organisms were correctly identified using the direct identification method. The identification of any organism with a confidence threshold <99.9% was not accepted. Approximately 81% of Gram-negative bacilli were correctly identified compared with 64% of Gram-positive cocci 36% of Gram-positive bacilli. The lysis-centrifugation direct identification method is a relatively inexpensive ($1.00) and rapid technique that will allow clinicians to receive the identification of organisms from approximately 70% of bacteremic patients 6 to 24 hours early than waiting for sufficient growth. This should allow clinicians to make better informed empiric antimicrobial choices to manage their patients. All authors: No reported disclosures.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207