MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401616801 · doi:10.1183/13993003.01365-2024

The end of the road for blood RNA biomarkers as triage tests for symptomatic pulmonary tuberculosis among spontaneous sputum producers?

2024· letter· en· W4401616801 on OpenAlexaff
James Greenan-Barrett, Rishi K Gupta, Mahdad Noursadeghi

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineSputumTuberculosisTriagePulmonary tuberculosisIntensive care medicineMedical emergencyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extract In 2022, an estimated 3.1 million people with tuberculosis (TB) remained undiagnosed [1] despite the global roll-out of rapid molecular tests for Mycobacterium tuberculosis, such as Xpert Ultra and Truenat MTB plus [2]. In pulmonary TB, these tests rely on the availability of a respiratory sample. Sputum induction or invasive sampling are required in sputum-scarce individuals, but often unavailable in resource-limited settings. Moreover, even among spontaneous sputum producers, resource constraints may limit the number of rapid molecular tests for M. tuberculosis that can be performed programmatically. Detecting host immune perturbations in response to M. tuberculosis infection, for example with blood RNA biomarkers, has been proposed as a triage approach to guide further confirmatory testing. Such an approach seeks to reduce the number of confirmatory tests performed, and direct these tests to higher risk individuals. Numerous RNA signatures, comprising quantitation of the expression of one or more genes, have been described with excellent diagnostic performance in their discovery populations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0240.021
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.009

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory Journal→Same topicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology→French-language works237,207→