Performance evaluation of the bio-rad BioPlex 2200 multiplex system in the detection of measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella-zoster antibodies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella-zoster (MMRV) immunity testing is important in occupational screening of healthcare workers and at-risk populations. The goal of this study was to compare the performance of the Bio-Rad BioPlex 2200 MMRV multiplex fluorescence immunoassay (MFI) against two enzyme immunoassay (EIA) methods: the Bio-Rad Evolis Twin Plus measles, mumps, and varicella-zoster (MMV) IgG assay and the Abbott Architect Rubella IgG assay. Clinically uncharacterized serum specimens were obtained and analyzed using the Bio-Rad BioPlex assay and compared against the EIA methods. The Bio-Rad BioPlex demonstrated total agreement of 85.5% (95% confidence interval (CI), 78.0 to 90.7%), 92.7% (95% confidence interval (CI), 86.7 to 96.1%), 92.4% (95% confidence interval (CI), 86.9 to 95.7%), and 98.8% (95% confidence interval (CI), 93.7 to 99.8%) for measles, mumps, varicella-zoster, and rubella, respectively, against the current EIA methods. Furthermore, precision testing agreed with the manufacturer's package insert in 10 of 13 pooled samples. These data indicate that the Bio-Rad BioPlex has comparable performance to the EIA methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".