MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283316992 · doi:10.1002/admt.202200208

Innovations and Challenges in Electroanalytical Tools for Rapid Biosurveillance of SARS‐CoV‐2

2022· article· en· W4283316992 on OpenAlexafffund
Sina Ardalan, Anna Ignaszak

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Materials Technologies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNew Brunswick Innovation FoundationFondation de la recherche en santé du Nouveau-Brunswick
KeywordsPoint-of-care testingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PandemicInternet of ThingsComputer scienceCoronavirusPoint of careNanotechnologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)VirologyMedicineDiseaseInternet privacyImmunologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, preventive social paradigms and vaccine development have undergone serious renovations, which drastically reduced the viral spread and increased collective immunity. Although the technological advancements in diagnostic systems for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection are groundbreaking, the lack of sensitive, robust, and consumer-end point-of-care (POC) devices with smartphone connectivity are conspicuously felt. Despite its revolutionary impact on biotechnology and molecular diagnostics, the reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction technique as the gold standard in COVID-19 diagnosis is not suitable for rapid testing. Today's POC tests are dominated by the lateral flow assay technique, with inadequate sensitivity and lack of internet connectivity. Herein, the biosensing advancements in Internet of Things (IoT)-integrated electroanalytical tools as superior POC devices for SARS-CoV-2 detection will be demonstrated. Meanwhile, the impeding factors pivotal for the successful deployment of such novel bioanalytical devices, including the incongruous standards, redundant guidelines, and the limitations of IoT modules will be discussed.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Materials TechnologiesSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207