MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092830819 · doi:10.1097/cce.0000000000000184

Molecular Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease 2019

2020· review· en· W3092830819 on OpenAlexaff
Claúdia C. dos Santos, Barbara A. Zehnbauer, Uriel Trahtemberg, John C. Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Explorations · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Center for Immunization and Respiratory DiseasesCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsCoronavirusDiseasePandemicMolecular diagnosticsMedicineIntensive care medicineVirologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Public healthPathologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)BioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To review molecular diagnostics for coronavirus disease 2019. The world is in the midst of a coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Containing the spread of the severe acute respiratory distress coronavirus is critical. Instrumental to the future success is the ability to reliably and reproducibly detect this inciting pathogen to inform public health containment policies and treatment decisions. DATA SOURCES: Molecular diagnostics focusing on molecular detection methodologies for detection of the virus and the presence of the disease. STUDY SELECTION: Narrative review. DATA EXTRACTION: Literature, PubMed, Scopus, and official government documents. DATA SYNTHESIS: Diagnosing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus is done through real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction tests, cell culture, and serology. For patients, diagnostics are an integral part of a full medical history, physical examinations, blood tests, and diagnostic imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Here, we review current approaches to the molecular diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019.

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)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care ExplorationsSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207