MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406966202 · doi:10.1371/journal.pwat.0000291

Quantification of Legionella pneumophila in building potable water systems: A meta-analysis comparing qPCR and culture-based detection methods

2025· article· en· W4406966202 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Water · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLegionella and Acanthamoeba research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBundesamt für Lebensmittelsicherheit und VeterinärwesenFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesBundesamt für Gesundheit
KeywordsLegionella pneumophilaLegionellaPotable waterEnvironmental scienceMicrobiologyBiologyEnvironmental engineeringBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) offers a rapid, automated, and potentially on-site method for quantifying L. pneumophila in building potable water systems, complementing and potentially replacing traditional culture-based techniques. However, its application in assessing human health risks is complicated by a tendency to overestimate risks due to the detection of genomic copies unassociated with viable, infectious bacteria. This study examines the relationship between L. pneumophila measurements via qPCR and culture-based methods, aiming to establish qPCR-to-culture concentration ratios needed to inform associated health risks. Eligible studies collected quantitative data on L. pneumophila concentrations using molecular and culture-based methods within paired water samples. We developed a Poisson lognormal ratio model and a random-effects meta-analysis model to analyze variations in qPCR-to-culture ratios within and across sites. Of the 17 studies in the systematic review, seven, including 23 site-specific data sets, were used for meta-analysis. Our findings indicate these ratios typically vary from 1:1 to 100:1, with ratios close to 1:1 predicted at all sites. Consequently, adopting a default 1:1 conversion factor appears necessary as a cautious approach to convert qPCR concentrations to culturable concentrations for use in health risk models, such as quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA). Where this approach may be too conservative, viability-qPCR could improve the accuracy of qPCR-based QMRA. Standardizing qPCR and culture-based methods and reporting site-specific environmental factors affecting L. pneumophila culturability would improve understanding of the relationship between the two methods. The ratio model introduced here advances beyond simple correlation analyses, facilitating investigations of temporal and spatial heterogeneities in the relationship. This analysis is a step forward in the integration of QMRA and molecular biology, and the framework demonstrated for L. pneumophila is applicable to other pathogens monitored in the environment.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.342
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