MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765759611 · doi:10.3390/s17112464

Electrochemical Detection of Plasma Immunoglobulin as a Biomarker for Alzheimer’s Disease

2017· article· en· W2765759611 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Goulielmos-Zois Garyfallou, Orlando Ketebu, Samet Şahin, Elizabeta B. Mukaetova‐Ladinska, Michael Catt, Eileen Hao Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrochemical sensors and biosensors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPetroleum Technology Development FundEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilAlzheimer Society
KeywordsPolyclonal antibodiesAntibodyBiomarkerSerial dilutionAlbuminImmunoglobulin GBlood plasmaMedicineImmunoassayImmunologyChemistryPathologyInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The clinical diagnosis and treatment of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) represent a challenge to clinicians due to the variability of clinical symptomatology as well as the unavailability of reliable diagnostic tests. In this study, the development of a novel electrochemical assay and its potential to detect peripheral blood biomarkers to diagnose AD using plasma immunoglobulins is investigated. The immunosensor employs a gold electrode as the immobilizing substrate, albumin depleted plasma immunoglobulin as the biomarker, and polyclonal rabbit Anti-human immunoglobulin (against IgA, IgG, IgM) as the receptor for plasma conjugation. The assay showed good response, sensitivity and reproducibility in differentiating plasma immunoglobulin from AD and control subjects down to 10−9 dilutions of plasma immunoglobulin representing plasma content concentrations in the pg mL−1 range. The newly developed assay is highly sensitive, less time consuming, easy to handle, can be easily modified to detect other dementia-related biomarkers in blood samples, and can be easily integrated into portable devices.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
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

Citations32
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicElectrochemical sensors and biosensorsFrench-language works237,207