MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090991064 · doi:10.1101/2020.09.28.20200915

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence survey estimates are affected by anti-nucleocapsid antibody decline

2020· preprint· en· W3090991064 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shelly Bolotin, Vanessa Tran, Selma Osman, Kevin A. Brown, Sarah A. Buchan, Eugene Joh, Shelley L. Deeks, Vanessa Allen

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoToronto Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeroprevalenceAntibodySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineVirologyVeterinary medicineInternal medicineImmunologyDiseaseSerologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We analyzed 21,676 residual specimens from Ontario, Canada collected between March-August, 2020 to investigate the effect of antibody decline on SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence estimates. Testing specimens orthogonally using the Abbott (anti-nucleocapsid) and then the Ortho (anti-spike) assays, seroprevalence estimates ranged from 0.4%-1.4%, despite ongoing disease activity. The geometric mean concentration (GMC) of antibody-positive specimens decreased over time (p=0.015), and the GMC of antibody-negative specimens increased over time (p=0.0018). The association between the two tests decreased each month (p<0.001), suggesting anti-N antibody decline. Lowering the Abbott index cut-off from 1.4 to 0.7 resulted in a 16% increase in positive specimens.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.396
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.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207