MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206496175 · doi:10.1101/2021.12.30.21268509

Viral cultures, PCR Cycle threshold values and viral load estimation for COVID-19 infectious potential assessment in transplant patients: systematic review - Protocol Version 30 December 2021

2022· preprint· en· W4206496175 on OpenAlexaff
Tom Jefferson, Elizabeth Spencer, Susanna Maltoni, Jon Brassey, Igho Onakpoya, Elena Cecilia Roşca, Annette Plüddemann, David H. Evans, John Conly, Carl Heneghan

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViral loadImmunosuppressionViral sheddingMedicineVirologyImmunologyViral cultureVaccinationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Hematopoietic stem cell transplantationVirusInfectious disease (medical specialty)TransplantationBiologyDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This is the protocol for a systematic review focussing on people receiving solid organ or hematopoietic stem cell transplants. Our research questions are as follows: What is the relationship between serial PCR Ct value or other measures of viral burden, and the likelihood and duration of the presence of infectious virus from viral culture, among transplant recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection? What is the influence of age, sex, underlying pathologies, degree of immunosuppression, vaccination status, COVID-19 symptoms and COVID-19 disease course on viral burden and the likelihood of presence of infectious SARS-CoV-2? We will include single studies reporting serial Cts from sequential rt-PCR testing or other measures of viral burden such as RNA gene copies of respiratory samples (from nasopharyngeal specimens) along with viral culture data on the same samples, from patients about to receive a transplant or who are post transplant with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.331 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207