MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3097232011 · doi:10.1098/rspa.2020.0398

Microfluidic devices for the detection of viruses: aspects of emergency fabrication during the COVID-19 pandemic and other outbreaks

2020· review· en· W3097232011 on OpenAlexaff
José Alvim Berkenbrock, Rafaela Grecco-Machado, Sven Achenbach

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicComputer scienceMicrofluidicsRisk analysis (engineering)NanotechnologyOutbreakEngineeringData scienceDiseaseBusinessVirologyMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)Materials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extensive testing of populations against COVID-19 has been suggested as a game-changer quest to control the spread of this contagious disease and to avoid further disruption in our social, healthcare and economical systems. Nonetheless, testing millions of people for a new virus brings about quite a few challenges. The development of effective tests for the new coronavirus has become a worldwide task that relies on recent discoveries and lessons learned from past outbreaks. In this work, we review the most recent publications on microfluidics devices for the detection of viruses. The topics of discussion include different detection approaches, methods of signalling and fabrication techniques. Besides the miniaturization of traditional benchtop detection assays, approaches such as electrochemical analyses, field-effect transistors and resistive pulse sensors are considered. For emergency fabrication of quick test kits, the local capabilities must be evaluated, and the joint work of universities, industries, and governments seems to be an unequivocal necessity.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations54
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering SciencesSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207