MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7075688905

Rapid method for sensitive screening of oligosaccharide epitopes in the lipooligosaccharide from Campylobacter jejuni strains isolated from Guillain-Barre syndrome and Miller Fisher syndrome patients

2008· article· en· W7075688905 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCampylobacter jejuniGlycanRNase PCampylobacterEpitopeOligosaccharideProteinase KEnzyme
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Campylobacter jejuni lipooligosaccharide (LOS) can trigger Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) due to its similarity to human gangliosides. Rapid and accurate structural elucidation of the LOS glycan of a strain isolated from a GBS patient could help physicians determine the spectrum of anti-ganglioside antibodies likely to be found and therefore provide valuable assistance in establishing an appropriate course of treatment. The ability of implemented mass spectrometry-based approaches in a clinical setting has been limited by the laborious and time-consuming nature of the protocols, typically 3 to 4 days, used to prepare LOS. In order to improve the analytical throughput, microwave-assisted enzymatic digestion was investigated. In this study, the bacterial cells were suspended in 50 μl of 20 mM ammonium acetate buffer containing DNase and RNase and treated by direct microwave irradiation for 3 min. Then, proteinase K was added and the samples were again microwaved. The intact LOS samples were analyzed using electrophoresis-assisted open-tubular liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. The reliability of the rapid, high-throughput technique was demonstrated through analysis of LOS glycans from 73 C. jejuni strains. The structure was elucidated using material from a single colony. The total time for sample preparation and MS analysis is less than 60 min.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score0.734

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207