MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390187097 · doi:10.1016/j.jctube.2023.100412

Biosensors; nanomaterial-based methods in diagnosing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis

2023· article· en· W4390187097 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ahmad Mobed, Mohammad Darvishi, Fereshteh Kohansal, Fatemeh Moradi Dehfooli, Iraj Alipourfard, Amir Tahavvori, Farhood Ghazi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Tuberculosis and Other Mycobacterial Diseases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TabrizResearch Institute for Aging, University of WaterlooTabriz University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsMedicineTuberculosisMycobacterium tuberculosisBiosensorNontuberculous mycobacteriaMycobacteriumNanotechnologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) before the progression of pulmonary infection can be very effective in its early treatment. The Mtb grows so slowly that it takes about 6–8 weeks to be diagnosed even using sensitive cell culture methods. The main opponent in tuberculosis (TB) and nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) epidemiology, like in all contagious diseases, is to pinpoint the source of infection and reveal its transmission and dispersion ways in the environment. It is crucial to be able to distinguish and monitor specific mycobacterium strains in order to do this. In food analysis, clinical diagnosis, environmental monitoring, and bioprocess, biosensing technologies have been improved to manage and detect Mtb. Biosensors are progressively being considered pioneering tools for point-of-care diagnostics in Mtb discoveries. In this review, we present an epitome of recent developments of biosensing technologies for M. tuberculosis detection, which are categorized on the basis of types of electrochemical, Fluorescent, Photo-thermal, Lateral Flow, Magneto-resistive, Laser, Plasmonic, and Optic biosensors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Tuberculosis and Other Mycobacterial DiseasesSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207