MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6976966149 · doi:10.60692/yz28y-snj80

Evaluation of 9 rapid diagnostic tests for screening HIV infection, in Lomé, Togo

2014· article· en· W6976966149 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Diagnostic testDiagnostic accuracyHIV diagnosisHIV screeningGold standard (test)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HIV rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) could be greatly contributive for a universal access to HIV diagnosis. However, according to the WHO, these tests need to be assessed before they can be used in routine. We assessed 9 RDT in routine clinical use between 2009 and 2013. The sensitivity and specificity observed for 7 tests were ≥ 99% and ≥ 98%, respectively: FIRST RESPONSE HIV1-2-O PMC Medical, India, GENIE Fast HIV 1-2 and GENIE™ III HIV1/2 Bio-Rad, France, HIV TRI-DOT + Ag; J. Mitra, INDIA; SD BIOLINE HIV1/2 3.0 and SD BIOLINE HIV/SYPHILIS DUO Standard Diagnostic, Korea; and VIKIA HIV1/2; BioMérieux, France. Two tests had performances inferior to WHO recommendations: INSTI HIV1/2 Biolytical Canada; sensitivity = 97.8% and HEXAGON HIV HUMAN GmbH Germany; specificity = 94.8%. Seven of 9 RDT had excellent performances. Nevertheless, they can be used only after training staff, and taking into account national algorithm for their safe use. L'utilisation des tests de diagnostic rapide (TDR) du virus de l'immunodéficience humaine (VIH) est importante pour l'accès universel au diagnostic du VIH. Cependant, selon l'Organisation Mondiale de la santé, leur évaluation est indispensable avant la mise à disposition des prestataires. Nous avons évalué en routine 9 TDR entre 2009–2013. La sensibilité et la spécificité observées pour 7 tests (FIRST RESPONSE HIV1-2-O PMC Medical, India, GENIE FAST HIV 1-2 et GENIE™ III HIV1/2 Bio-Rad, France, HIV TRI-DOT + Ag ; J. Mitra, INDIA ; SD BIOLINE HIV-1/2 3.0 et SD BIOLINE HIV/SYPHILIS DUO Standard Diagnostic, Korea ; et VIKIA HIV1/2 ; Bio Mérieux, France) étaient respectivement ≥ 99 % et ≥ 98 %. Deux tests avaient des performances en dessous de celles recommandées par l'OMS (INSTI HIV1/2 Biolytical Canada ; sensibilité = 97,8 % et HEXAGON HIV HUMAN GmbH Germany ; spécificité = 94,8 %) La performance observée pour 7 des 9 TDR est excellente. Cependant, leur utilisation nécessite la formation des prestataires et le respect de l'algorithme national.

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information System→Same topicHIV Research and Treatment→French-language works237,207→