Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva by a low-cost LSPR-based sensor
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic started more than 3 years ago, but the containment of the spread is still a challenge. Screening is imperative for informed decision making by government authorities to contain the spread of the virus locally. The access to screening tests is disproportional, due to the lack of access to reagents, equipment, finances or because of supply chain disruptions. Low and middle-income countries have especially suffered with the lack of these resources. Here, we propose a low cost and easily constructed biosensor device based on localized surface plasmon resonance, or LSPR, for the screening of SARS-CoV-2. The biosensor device, dubbed "sensor" for simplicity, was constructed in two modalities: (1) viral detection in saliva and (2) antibody against COVID in saliva. Saliva collected from 18 patients were tested in triplicates. Both sensors successfully classified all COVID positive patients (among hospitalized and non-hospitalized). From the COVID negative patients 7/8 patients were correctly classified. For both sensors, sensitivity was determined as 100% (95% CI 79.5-100) and specificity as 87.5% (95% CI 80.5-100). The reagents and equipment used for the construction and deployment of this sensor are ubiquitous and low-cost. This sensor technology can then add to the potential solution for challenges related to screening tests in underserved communities.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it