MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898881636 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.180866

Identifying the Pathogen by Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction in Bone and Joint Infections: Challenges and Future

2018· letter· en· W2898881636 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yvonne Achermann, Annelies S. Zinkernagel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2018
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitätsspital ZürichUniversität Zürich
KeywordsBiofilmMultiplex polymerase chain reactionMultiplexMicrobiologyPathogenBacteriaAntibioticsMedicineJoint infectionsMicrobiological culturePolymerase chain reactionBiologyBioinformaticsSurgeryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diagnosis of bone and joint infections remains a challenge. In addition to the difficulty of obtaining sufficient and good clinical samples for microbiological assessment, the bacteria are often few and do not always grow. In these typical biofilm-associated infections, bacteria are embedded in a biofilm matrix, protecting them from the host’s immune system as well as from antibiotics used to treat the infection. In addition, biofilm-associated bacteria are difficult to cultivate because they are not easily recovered from the biofilm, they may be few in number, and they are often in a dormant or slow-growing state. To circumvent these difficulties encountered in recovering the bacteria in classical bacterial cultures, some possibilities that have been discussed are PCR, microcalorimetry, and concentrating the recovered fluids. Aiming to broaden the spectrum and efficiency, multiplex PCR assays have been introduced to identify the causative pathogen in bone and joint infections1,2,3,4. Because bacterial growth is not required, multiplex PCR have been thought to be the solution for diagnosis of culture-negative orthopedic infections in patients who already took antibiotics prior to the diagnostic investigation. All assays promised to have advantages of a rapid test time and to detect a large number of microorganisms, with specific primers also allowing diagnosis of polymicrobial infections. However, to date no commercial assay has found its way into routine practice, mainly because of low sensitivity or the lack of primers for pathogens not included in the multiplex primers kits. In this issue of The Journal , Morgenstern, et al 5 showed results of a prospective … Address correspondence to Dr. Y. Achermann, Division of Infectious Diseases and Hospital Epidemiology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, CH-8091 Zurich, Switzerland. E-mail: yvonne.achermann{at}usz.ch

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicOrthopedic Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207