MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084291069 · doi:10.1128/cmr.00053-19

Performance and Application of 16S rRNA Gene Cycle Sequencing for Routine Identification of Bacteria in the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory

2020· review· en· W3084291069 on OpenAlexaff
Deirdre L. Church, Lorenzo Cerutti, Antoine Gürtler, Thomas P. Griener, Adrian M. Zelazny, Stefan Emler

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Microbiology Reviews · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
Keywords16S ribosomal RNAIdentification (biology)Clinical microbiologyBiologySanger sequencingBacteriaComputational biologyMicrobiologyRibosomal RNADNA sequencingGeneGeneticsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review provides a state-of-the-art description of the performance of Sanger cycle sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene for routine identification of bacteria in the clinical microbiology laboratory. A detailed description of the technology and current methodology is outlined with a major focus on proper data analyses and interpretation of sequences. The remainder of the article is focused on a comprehensive evaluation of the application of this method for identification of bacterial pathogens based on analyses of 16S multialignment sequences. In particular, the existing limitations of similarity within 16S for genus- and species-level differentiation of clinically relevant pathogens and the lack of sequence data currently available in public databases is highlighted. A multiyear experience is described of a large regional clinical microbiology service with direct 16S broad-range PCR followed by cycle sequencing for direct detection of pathogens in appropriate clinical samples. The ability of proteomics (matrix-assisted desorption ionization-time of flight) versus 16S sequencing for bacterial identification and genotyping is compared. Finally, the potential for whole-genome analysis by next-generation sequencing (NGS) to replace 16S sequencing for routine diagnostic use is presented for several applications, including the barriers that must be overcome to fully implement newer genomic methods in clinical microbiology. A future challenge for large clinical, reference, and research laboratories, as well as for industry, will be the translation of vast amounts of accrued NGS microbial data into convenient algorithm testing schemes for various applications (i.e., microbial identification, genotyping, and metagenomics and microbiome analyses) so that clinically relevant information can be reported to physicians in a format that is understood and actionable. These challenges will not be faced by clinical microbiologists alone but by every scientist involved in a domain where natural diversity of genes and gene sequences plays a critical role in disease, health, pathogenicity, epidemiology, and other aspects of life-forms. Overcoming these challenges will require global multidisciplinary efforts across fields that do not normally interact with the clinical arena to make vast amounts of sequencing data clinically interpretable and actionable at the bedside.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.312 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations327
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Microbiology ReviewsSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207