MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249987803 · doi:10.7554/elife.29213.032

Author response: Detection of human disease conditions by single-cell morpho-rheological phenotyping of blood

2017· peer-review· en· W4249987803 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole Toepfner, C. Herold, Oliver Otto, Philipp Rosendahl, Angela Jacobi, Martin Kräter, Julia Stächele, Leonhard Menschner, Maik Herbig, Laura Ciuffreda, Lisa Ranford‐Cartwright, Michał Grzybek, Ünal Coskun, Elisabeth Reithuber, Geneviève Garriss, Peter Mellroth, Birgitta Henriques‐Normark, Nicola Tregay, Meinolf Suttorp, Martin Bornhäuser, Edwin R. Chilvers, Reinhard Berner, Jochen Guck

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood properties and coagulation
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseMedicineComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When you are sick and go to the doctor, it is often not obvious what exactly is wrong — what is causing fever, nausea, shortness of breath or other symptoms. It is important to find this out quickly so that the right action can be taken. One of the first steps is to obtain a blood sample and to count how many of the different blood cells are present in it. This is called a complete blood count, and the information it provides has turned out to be surprisingly useful. A large number of certain white blood cells, for example, can show that the body is fighting an infection. But there might be several reasons why the number of white blood cells has increased, so this information alone is often not enough for a specific diagnosis. There are many hundreds of possible tests that can supplement the results of a complete blood count. These might identify bacteria or measure the concentrations of certain molecules in the blood, for example. But which test will give the important clue that reveals the source of the illness? This can be difficult to predict. Although each test helps to narrow down the final diagnosis they become increasingly expensive and time-consuming to perform, and rapid action is often important when treating a disease. Can we get more decisive information from the initial blood test by measuring other properties of the blood cells? Toepfner et al. now show that this is possible using a technique called real-time deformability cytometry. This method forces the blood cells in a small drop of blood to flow extremely rapidly through a narrow microfluidic channel while they are imaged by a fast camera. A computer algorithm can then analyze the size and stiffness of the blood cells in real-time. Toepfner et al. show that this approach can detect characteristic changes that affect blood cells as a result of malaria, spherocytosis, bacterial and viral infections, and leukemia. Furthermore, many thousands of blood cells can be measured in a few minutes — fast enough to be suitable as a diagnostic test. These proof-of-concept findings can now be used to develop actual diagnostic tests for a wide range of blood-related diseases. The approach could also be used to test which of several drugs is working to treat a certain medical condition, and to monitor whether the treatment is progressing as planned.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0100.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3150.152

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlood properties and coagulationFrench-language works237,207