MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282028400 · doi:10.1016/j.biosx.2022.100176

Improving immunoassay detection accuracy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies through dual modality validation

2022· article· en· W4282028400 on OpenAlexaff
Yuhao Ma, Daniel To, Jie Zeng, Lian C. T. Shoute, Meng Wu, Shawn Babiuk, Ran Zhuo, Carmen Charlton, Jamil N. Kanji, Lorne Babiuk, Jie Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueBiosensors and Bioelectronics X · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsCanadian Food Inspection AgencyUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunoassaySerologyFluorescenceAnalyteAlexa FluorGold standard (test)AntibodyColloidal goldDetection limitChemistryChromatographyMolecular biologyMedicineMaterials scienceNanoparticleNanotechnologyBiologyImmunologyRadiologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel test strategy is proposed with dual-modality detection techniques for COVID-19 antibody detection. The full-length S protein of SARS-CoV-2 was chemically immobilized on a glass surface to capture anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG in patient serum and was detected through either Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy (EIS) or fluorescence imaging with labeled secondary antibodies. Gold nanoparticles conjugated with protein G were used as the probe and the bound GNP-G was detected through EIS measurements. Anti-human-IgG conjugated with the fluorescent tag Alexa Fluor 488 was used as the probe for fluorescence imaging. Clinical SARS-CoV-2 IgG positive serum and negative controls were used to validate both modalities. For fluorescence-based detection, a high sensitivity was noticed with a quantification range of 0.01-0.1 A.U.C. and a LOD of 0.004 A.U.C. This study demonstrates the possibility of utilizing different measurement techniques in conjunction for improved COVID-19 serology testing.

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)0.000
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.773

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiosensors and Bioelectronics XSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207