MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396976877 · doi:10.3390/v16050794

Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay Using Henipavirus-Receptor EphrinB2 and Monoclonal Antibodies for Detecting Nipah and Hendra Viruses

2024· article· en· W4396976877 on OpenAlexafffund
Wenjun Zhu, Greg Smith, Bradley Pickering, Logan Banadyga, Ming Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueViruses · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVirology and Viral Diseases
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of ManitobaCanadian Food Inspection Agency
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of CanadaCanadian Food Inspection Agency
KeywordsHendra VirusVirologyMonoclonal antibodyAntibodyBiologyHepatitis E virusAntigenMicrobiologyVirusImmunologyGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Nipah virus (NiV) and the Hendra virus (HeV) are highly pathogenic zoonotic diseases that can cause fatal infections in humans and animals. Early detection is critical for the control of NiV and HeV infections. We present the development of two antigen-detection ELISAs (AgELISAs) using the henipavirus-receptor EphrinB2 and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to detect NiV and HeV. The NiV AgELISA detected only NiV, whereas the NiV/HeV AgELISA detected both NiV and HeV. The diagnostic specificities of the NiV AgELISA and the NiV/HeV AgELISA were 100% and 97.8%, respectively. Both assays were specific for henipaviruses and showed no cross-reactivity with other viruses. The AgELISAs detected NiV antigen in experimental pig nasal wash samples taken at 4 days post-infection. With the combination of both AgELISAs, NiV can be differentiated from HeV. Complementing other henipavirus detection methods, these two newly developed AgELISAs can rapidly detect NiV and HeV in a large number of samples and are suitable for use in remote areas where other tests are not available.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirusesSame topicVirology and Viral DiseasesFrench-language works237,207