Bacterial Biomarkers of the Oropharyngeal and Oral Cavity during SARS-CoV-2 Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1) Background: Individuals with COVID-19 display different forms of disease severity and the upper respiratory tract microbiome has been suggested to play a crucial role in the development of its symptoms. (2) Methods: The present study analyzed the microbial profiles of the oral cavity and oropharynx of 182 COVID-19 patients compared to 75 unaffected individuals. The samples were obtained from gargle screening samples. 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing was applied to analyze the samples. (3) Results: The present study shows that SARS-CoV-2 infection induced significant differences in bacterial community assemblages, with Prevotella and Veillonella as biomarkers for positive-tested people and Streptococcus and Actinomyces for negative-tested people. It also suggests a state of dysbiosis on the part of the infected individuals due to significant differences in the bacterial community in favor of a microbiome richer in opportunistic pathogens. (4) Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 infection induces dysbiosis in the upper respiratory tract. The identification of these opportunistic pathogenic biomarkers could be a new screening and prevention tool for people with prior dysbiosis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".