MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412541033 · doi:10.1149/ma2025-01602907mtgabs

(<i>Invited</i>) Translation of Plasmonic Sensors for Point-of-Care Monitoring

2025· article· en· W4412541033 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jean‐François Masson

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiosensors and Analytical Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint of careTranslation (biology)PlasmonPoint (geometry)Point-of-care testingNanotechnologyComputer scienceMedicineOptoelectronicsPhysicsMaterials scienceChemistryNursingPathologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this presentation, we will focus on the recent use of plasmonic sensors for clinical trials to monitor the presence of antibodies elicited by individuals who have been infected or vaccinated against COVID-19 and to monitor patients before blood donation or transfusion. In this case, we were using a portable SPR platform to screen for the presence of antibodies or proteins in the sera of individuals. In the case of COVID, we have measured the quality of their immune response with affinity and pseudo-neutralization assays in more than 1000 clinical samples. We will present data on the immune response to the original strain and to a number of variants of concern in Canada and elsewhere, and how it correlates with more established biological techniques such as ELISA and microneutralization. The second example will showcase our efforts in monitoring IgA and ferritin in blood in the context of blood drives and transfusions. We will also show a new method to rapidly collect serum from blood to facilitate deployment of the sensors at the point of need.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.017

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicBiosensors and Analytical DetectionFrench-language works237,207