MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293392998 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10270

Comparative performance data for multiplex SARS-CoV-2 serological assays from a large panel of dried blood spot specimens

2022· article· en· W4293392998 on OpenAlexafffund
François Cholette, Rissa Fabia, Angela Harris, Hannah Ellis, Karla Cachero, Lukas Schroeder, Christine Mesa, Philip Lacap, Corey Arnold, Yannick Galipeau, Marc‐André Langlois, Karen Colwill, Anne‐Claude Gingras, Allison McGeer, Elizabeth Giles, Jacqueline Day, Carla Osiowy, Yves Durocher, Catherine Hankins, Bruce Mazer, Michael Drebot, John Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of TorontoInstitute of Infection and ImmunityUniversity of OttawaLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersCanada Foundation for InnovationGovernment of OntarioOntario GenomicsGenome Canada
KeywordsDried blood spotMultiplexMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)SerologyVirologyDried bloodAntibody titerPandemicAntibodyImmunoassayTiter2019-20 coronavirus outbreakImmunologyBiologyDiseaseInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)Bioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

= 90). Our findings suggest that several assays are suitable for serosurveillance (sensitivity >97% and specificity >98%). In contrast to other reports, we did not observe an improvement in performance using multiple antigen consensus-based rules to establish overall seropositivity. This may be due to our DBS panel which consisted of samples collected from convalescent COVID-19 patients with significant anti-spike, -receptor binding domain (RBD), and -nucleocapsid antibody titers. This study demonstrates that biological specimens collected as DBS coupled with one of several readily available assays are useful for large-scale COVID-19 serosurveillance.

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)0.000
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 score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207