MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022803855 · doi:10.1101/2020.04.29.20075747

Development and validation of direct RT-LAMP for SARS-CoV-2

2020· preprint· en· W3022803855 on OpenAlexafffund
Abu Naser Mohon, Jana Hundt, Guido van Marle, Kanti Pabbaraju, Byron M. Berenger, Thomas P. Griener, Luiz F. Lisboa, Deirdre L. Church, Markus Czub, Alexander L. Greninger, Keith R. Jerome, Cody Doolan, Dylan R. Pillai

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiosensors and Analytical Detection
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory ServicesProvincial Laboratory of Public HealthUniversity of Calgary
FundersGenome CanadaM.J. Murdock Charitable Trust
KeywordsReverse transcriptaseDetection limitVirologyRecombinant DNAMolecular biologyGeneReal-time polymerase chain reactionRNA extractionBiologyRNAReverse transcription polymerase chain reactionChemistryChromatographyMessenger RNAGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We have developed a reverse-transcriptase loop mediated amplification (RT-LAMP) method targeting genes encoding the Spike (S) protein and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) of SARS-CoV-2. The LAMP assay achieves comparable limit of detection as commonly used RT-PCR protocols based on artificial targets, recombinant Sindbis virus, and clinical samples. Clinical validation of single-target (S gene) LAMP (N=120) showed a positive percent agreement (PPA) of 41/42 (97.62%) and negative percent agreement (NPA) of 77/78 (98.72%) compared to reference RT-PCR. Dual-target RT-LAMP (S and RdRP gene) achieved a PPA of 44/48 (91.97%) and NPA 72/72 (100%) when including discrepant samples. The assay can be performed without a formal extraction procedure, with lyophilized reagents which do need cold chain, and is amenable to point-of-care application with visual detection.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicBiosensors and Analytical DetectionFrench-language works237,207