MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993197026 · doi:10.1016/j.exppara.2019.107814

Concordance of Giardia duodenalis assemblages determined by different PCR methodologies in three observational studies in Cuba

2019· article· en· W2993197026 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Luis Enrique Jerez Puebla, Fidel Ángel Núñez, Jorge Fraga, Lázara Rojas Rivero, Iraís Atencio Millán, Lucía Ayllón Valdés, Isabel Martínez Silva, Norbert Müller, Lucy J. Robertson

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Parasitology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation of Sri LankaMinistry of Health, British ColumbiaSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyGenotypingGenotypePopulationDNA extractionGiardiaGeneticsPolymerase chain reactionGeneVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Giardia duodenalis is one of the most important intestinal parasites globally, especially in children, and in Cuba is the leading cause of chronic paediatric diarrhoea in this population. G. duodenalis is composed of eight genetic groups (or assemblages), two of which (A and B) are apparently zoonotic, occurring in both humans and other animals. However, consensus on the most appropriate genotyping scheme for optimal characterization of G. duodenalis isolates is lacking. In this article we present the results of three descriptive observational studies conducted in Havana, Cuba between 2010 and 2013, with the aim of comparing the results from molecular (PCR) approaches targeting different genes in order to assign with confidence 224 isolates of G. duodenalis to the correct assemblages. In each sub-study, following DNA isolation by the phenol/chloroform/isoamyl alcohol extraction method, PCR targeting the triose phosphate isomerase (tpi) gene was used for molecular characterization, as well as one additional PCR-method targeting another gene or pair of genes. DNA amplification was obtained in 87%, 83%, and 80% in the three sub-studies. Although excellent agreement (kappa index = 1) was recorded between results from some pairs of genes, for other combinations only moderate or substantial agreement was achieved. These results highlight the importance of interpretation of genotyping data, especially when single genetic markers are used. From the results of our studies, PCR targeting a combination of the tpi gene and the intergenic spacer region of rDNA may be a useful approach for the molecular characterization of G. duodenalis isolates.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental ParasitologySame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207