Evaluation of two bacteriophage-based rapid diagnostic methods for Salmonella spp. detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compares the PhageDx™Salmonella Assay (PhageDx assay) and VIDAS® UP Salmonella (SPT) assay for detecting Salmonella in selected food products. Both assays demonstrated equivalent specificity in detecting 107 Salmonella spp. isolates and 186 non-Salmonella strains from diverse genera. During testing of Salmonella in fresh cut romaine lettuce and raw ground turkey, the PhageDx assay was able to detect 0.2 to 2 CFU of Salmonella in 25 g lettuce and 375 g ground turkey after only 7 hours of incubation, which was significantly shorter than the 18 hours required by the SPT assay. Moreover, the performance of the PhageDx assay and the SPT assay was found to be statistically equivalent to the Canadian culture reference method MFHPB-20 (Chi-square < 3.84). Overall, this study demonstrates the PhageDx assay is a rapid and reliable tool for detecting Salmonella in selected food products and has a promising future to be a commercialized assay.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".