MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312132086 · doi:10.1016/j.jcv.2022.105356

Hunting for mpox (monkeypox) mimickers: Use of the Biofire meningitis/encephalitis panel on lesion swabs to support alternative viral diagnoses

2022· article· en· W4312132086 on OpenAlexaff
Bryn K. Joy, Alexis L. Donovan, Gregory R. McCracken, Janice Pettipas, Elsie Grudeski, Anna Majer, Russell Mandes, Tim Booth, Todd F. Hatchette, Glenn Patriquin, Jason J. LeBlanc

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Virology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Disease Control LaboratoryNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViral meningitisVirologyMedicineViral encephalitisEncephalitisMeningitisVirusBacterial meningitisPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mpox (formerly monkeypox) is an emerging zoonotic disease of public health concern that presents as a rash mimicking other common viral exanthems. Unlike traditional testing algorithms relying on several assays, the BioFire FilmArray meningitis/encephalitis (ME) panel simultaneously detects common viruses causing rashes; however, Biofire ME is only licensed for testing on cerebral spinal fluid. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated use of the Biofire ME panel for detection and discrimination of herpes simplex virus types 1 and 2 (HSV-1 and HSV-2), varicella zoster virus (VZV), human herpesviruses type 6 (HHV-6), enteroviruses (EVs), and human paraechoviruses (HPeVs) from a dermal or mucocutaneous swabs collected in universal transport media (UTM). STUDY DESIGN: Results of the BioFire ME panel were compared against methods used during clinical testing. Ten-fold serial dilutions in UTM of cultured viruses were used to compare analytical sensitivity, and analytical specificity was assessed using panels of microorganisms in UTM. Clinical sensitivity and specificity were assessed using 20 positive specimens each for HHV-1, HHV-2, HHV-6, VZV, EVs, and HPeV, as well as 35 known negative specimens that included 15 mpox-positive specimens. RESULTS: Biofire ME was as sensitive as comparator methods, and correctly discriminated all HSV-1, HSV-2, VZV, HHV-6, EVs, and HPeVs from mpox and mpox-mimickers. Cross-reaction between EV and rhinoviruses A, B, and C were noted in the specificity panel. CONCLUSIONS: Swabs in UTM collected for mpox testing are suitable for use on the Biofire ME panel, allowing more streamlined diagnostic testing for viral exanthems in patients under investigation for mpox 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 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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.212
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designObservational
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 venueJournal of Clinical VirologySame topicPoxvirus research and outbreaksFrench-language works237,207