MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127424074 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofab043

Comparative Analysis of Capillary vs Venous Blood for Serologic Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies by RPOC Lateral Flow Tests

2021· article· en· W3127424074 on OpenAlex
Muhammad Morshed, Inna Sekirov, Meghan McLennan, Paul N. Levett, Navdeep Chahil, Annie Mak, Erin Carruthers, Tamara Pidduck, Jesse Kustra, Jonathan Laley, Min-Kuang Lee, Kenneth Chu, Fred Burgess, Rohit Vijh, Lori Willis, Ray Wada, Rosemarie Blancaflor, Suni Boraston, Althea Hayden, Mel Krajden

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal HealthProvincial Health Services AuthorityBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of British Columbia
FundersGenome British Columbia
KeywordsMedicineSerologyAntibodyVenous bloodHemolysisImmunologyBlood collectionVirologyInternal medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A comparison of rapid point-of-care serology tests using finger prick and venous blood was done on 278 participants. In a laboratory setting, immunoglobulin G (IgG) sensitivity neared 100%; however, IgG sensitivity dramatically dropped (82%) in field testing. Possible factors include finger prick volume variability, hemolysis, cassette readability, and operator training.

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.

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 score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.299 · 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