MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322503208 · doi:10.3390/bios13030318

Capabilities of Double-Resonance LPG and SPR Methods for Hypersensitive Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Structural Proteins: A Comparative Study

2023· article· en· W4322503208 on OpenAlexafffund
Tinko Eftimov, Petia Genova-Kalоu, Georgi Dyankov, Wojtek J. Bock, Vihar Mankov, Sanaz Shoar Ghaffari, Petar Veselinov, Alla V. Arapova, Somayeh Makouei

Bibliographic record

VenueBiosensors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBulgarian National Science Fund
KeywordsSurface plasmon resonanceBiosensorCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Point-of-care testingSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)NanotechnologyVirologyComputer scienceMaterials scienceMedicineNanoparticleImmunologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The danger of the emergence of new viral diseases and their rapid spread demands apparatuses for continuous rapid monitoring in real time. This requires the creation of new bioanalytical methods that overcome the shortcomings of existing ones and are applicable for point-of-care diagnostics. For this purpose, a variety of biosensors have been developed and tested in proof-of-concept studies, but none of them have been introduced for commercial use so far. Given the importance of the problem, in this study, long-period grating (LPG) and surface plasmon resonance (SPR) biosensors, based on antibody detection, were examined, and their capabilities for SARS-CoV-2 structural proteins detection were established. Supersensitive detections of structural proteins in the order of several femtomoles were achieved by the LPG method, while the SPR method demonstrated a sensitivity of about one hundred femtomoles. The studied biosensors are compatible in sensitivity with ELISA and rapid antigen tests but, in contrast, they are quantitative, which makes them applicable for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection detection, especially during the early stages of viral replication.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiosensorsSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207